Quote:
Originally Posted by FawFul
Also for Stijn, overall quality next to gameplay isn't just determined by eyecandy. (although I agree ec is not a huge issue). But also the theme and ammo placement and so on is important. The main goal of a JCS competition isn't just 99% gameplay, and it isn't like "everything next to gameplay should be okay and when it's good enough, rest of the quality is considered by gameplay". You can't just slice JCS in two parts: Gameplay and eyecandy. It's more than just that.
|
But what other purpose does ammo placement serve than to improve gameplay? (And what do you exactly mean by "theme"?) I'd say you can separate level quality in the aspects of gameplay (or how well the level serves in facilitating a game of JJ2) and eyecandy (or how well it looks and, for the sake of simplicity, sounds). That isn't to say that only the gameplay should be important, how much attention is given to either aspect can and should be a matter of discussion. But in the end a level's purpose is to be a battleground for a JJ2 match. If it pleases the eyes and ears, that's a huge bonus, but a level that just looks good but has tons of dead ends and team imbalance (for example) will never get played often in serious matches, while a level that plays amazingly but looks horrible could become popular.
Obviously both aspects are intertwined to an extent and visuals can help to guide players through levels, bring attention to important locations and such. But as much as I love the usage of JCS as a tool to make stuff that looks great, eyecandy is always secondary to gameplay. Of course things are completely different for single player levels, but I don't think that's what you're worried about.
(The only possible third criterion I could think of would be originality, which is somewhat important given the huge amount of excellent levels out there already.)
|