Staredit Network

During the past months I have noticed more and more that people have been shifting towards Complex and Impressive maps over the Simple & Fun maps. Where do I see such a shift in this? One is in the Map Productions forum. As you can see, and I've seen, the threads with the most topics belong to those extremely complex maps that hardly get finished. (*Note: By Complex & Impressive I do not mean Groundbreaking, I mean complexity in gameplay)
The Simple yet fun maps barely have any posts.

I will show as example my own maps and Moose's maps. I choose these because we are among the best known people on SeN, and have done both types of maps.

I'll start with the Complex Maps first.

Überena and Special Ops. Two maps which never got a full version out, yet followed by the masses. Personally, of both mapmakers, Moose and myself, those are the two maps I hate the most of each of us. But the public, loves them the most, even though they aren't finished.

rEvolution, Hungry Hungry Hydras, Aeon of Strife, Rocket Launchers and Teh Seekers. In my opinion, the most fun maps either of us have ever made, yet they are the least played. None of these threads got passed the first page and very few people know about these maps.

My question to you all is this? Why do you all strive for Complex & Impresive maps that you will most probably play once. Why not go for Simple & Fun maps that you can play over and over, each game being quite different.

People say that RPG's are the best map because they have the most breathtaking features. Yet, you can only play it once becasue the next time you play that map, it'll be the exact same thing. Then people keep away from the simple maps, like madness, evolves and small time play. Sure, you aren't impressed by what you see, but you did get involved in a good game.

A lot of people say that the best maps are the ones with the most complex triggers, best terrain and long gameplays. I beg to differ. A good map is the repetitive map in which you have fun time and time again because it is different everytime you play it.

What do you think? Simple or Complex?

I would say that simple and fun would be best, however its the fact that ideas are hard to come by nowadays, and making it simple would be well wouldn't make it very appealing. Its hard to make it a balance between simple and complex, too simple and you're looking like an idiot and too complex they just don't get it.

only a true map will have both qualities

It can't have both qualities because how could it be simple, but complex.

I would say simple and fun is the best though. I personally just think though that complex and impressive maps are just there to show your skill of map making; like for getting into clans as Insane said. Simple and fun maps are for having the most fun with and you can play over and over again without stopping.

I think they are both good.

Simplistic maps are good to play with friends and B'net children.

But, Complex maps (Imo) are kind of a way to show off your abilities, as a map maker. People who make complex maps, kind of feel triumphant when they look back at what they did. I know I am kind of talking about making and not playing.

I honestly don't care. Who ever sets the game up changes whether I want to play it or not. Some friends I'll play a 3 hour RPG, or others I'll play a quick round of Snipers and such.

I gues... It just depends.

I guess it would depend on how I feel at the time playing either.
When I'm just bored and want to cheer up quickly, or if I'm sleepy I go for the simple.
When I'm wide awake/jittery, I go for the more complex maps.

A map without fun isn't a map.

Fun/replayability factors are the most important things in any map. They're the ones that circulate.

So what if a map is complex or interesting. Is it fun to play? If not, then why bother playing it - it's gonna get retarded and boring. The point of maps are for people to play them and have fun. If not, you might as well go do something else other than play starcraft.

And remember, occam's razor. If there are two differnt ways to achieving the ultimate goal (which would be, fun factor), choose the simplier way.

I voted for Simple and Fun

It's fun to play a large-scale complex RPG. At the same time, its also fun to play rEvolution on Bnet or whatever. Both are equally good, just in different ways. On B.Net, most of the maps are simple and fun, and on singlplayer, its mostly complex. I personaly like playing both, although I prefer making complex maps.

Complexity>Simplicity.
Simplicity usually takes no thought, like defenses and stuff, I like having to use my brain once in a while.

Few people on battle.net appreciate the "complex" maps and will put the time and effort into understanding them. Yet, we still continue to make maps with wild systems, which ultimately, roughly over 50% of these "RPG of the century" maps lose even the mapper's interest in a couple of weeks and are never finished. Taking a simple a map and continuing to improve on it usually makes mapping funner, because the project simply keeps evolving and the mapper won't lose interest in his creation.

How can a map be simple and complex?
1. Play Teh Seekers.
2. Use Trigger Viewer on Teh Seekers.

Heh, I should update that map.

Yea, but some simple maps can take critical thinking (as in requiring lots of skill or strategy to master). Simple meaning there aren't as many triggers and/or the triggers aren't complex.

Look at altered starcraft. Simple triggers, yet takes critical thinking, as you would have to implement diferent strategies with these altered units.

ADDITION:
IMO it's easy to make simple maps, but it's really hard to make them simple, yet really good/fun at the same time.

CheeZe Eaters is a pretty simple yet fun game.

Wow this is a very good topic to discuss. However I think simple and fun has my vote. It all comes down to how much fun you have. If you can combine impresive and simple then your godlike. Complexity is much more rare because it usualy involves more tigger work and we all know how more trigger work can kill your map making vibe. Also when its complex, people don't know what to do on the map. It just leaves em dazed and confused.

I'm all for complexity, but it's hard to get people to understand or have the patience to learn all that. Maybe that's why my Pikmin and The Great Wall of Yellow maps have been so popular...

The little white toga guy on my right shoulder tells me complex and impressive stuff should deserve my attention the most, but the blood-red horned fella on my left tells me simplicity is the way to go.

Honestly, I'm pretty impulsive myself about what I play. But what I make is a different matter...

I like to be blown away by spectacle, but simple & fun gameplay is my favorite. Personally, I really don't like it when I have to read for 20 minutes about how to play this gargantuan RPG that I have no emotional investment in. Complex for short term, simple for long term.

I think complex can always be better, if it is presented in an understandable way. Look at Starcraft. If thousands of gamers can get that, than they can get any map you make.

I totally agree with you, but Starcraft is taught rather slowly and it gets more complex over time. By then you're having fun and you care about the story. I try to do that in my maps/campaigns as well. But all I was saying was that I don't (usually) like it when a complex battle system is dumped in my lap at the beginning of a game, when I really have no reason to care. Some people like that sort of thing, but it doesn't float my boat.

Well one thing that I like is to use very complex systems to do simple things.
One thing mentioned already is TeH Seekers.
Or possibly Tuxedo-Templars' Trigger Happy D

Basically I like a game that is simple play design, so it can be learned easily, but original and complex in the actual triggering underneath it all. One map that I am currently making is rapid factor, which dictates this idea rather well. Basically the object of the game is to dodge things and shoot enemies, but you use new systems to shoot, and the gameplay is much different than basically any games for starcraft today.

I think that games and maps should be both simplistic AND complex.

Simplistic in that the game can be readilly picked up by anyone and be quickly learned using basic strategies.

Complex in that the game has a bunch of other unique and defining characteristics that can easily define a master and an amature.

A perfect example of a game would be: Micro Arena.

"Two teams compete against each other to destroy the opponent's 'base' using micro and a vast selection of units."

A beginner can easily use random brute units like marines or ultralisks to charge in straightforward, yet complexly, there are defining factors in each choice for micro arena. Choosing a reaver with shuttle or tank with trans turns the game into a whole new ball park, Not only are you microing, but you have to manage your placement and effectively destroy the opponent's base. Tricky strategy.

Maps should be both! Both!

While I can enjoy 'simple' maps, my heart tugs at the long, drawn-out attachment with a great end reward.

-EE

When I make maps, I try to make them fun. If people on Battle.net enjoy them, then that is all that matters pretty much.

I have to disagree about the 'Teh Seekers'
I found that way more complexity then fun, no offense at all.
Anyone who knows anything about making maps knows how hard it is to create it, and I havn't figured it out yet (I haven't tried that hard, but whatever).
It doesn't have a lot of replayability; Sure the terrain changes and all, but there isn't that much difference in skill between a person who's been playing only that for over a month and a person who played 5 times.
Now Uberena.. Thats needs skill, and thats why people appreciate it (I just played it for my first time 2 days ago.. I'm hooked).
You have lots of choices, and the skill in changing the units fast to throw opponent off balance, calculate time to know when enemy will come and position units accordingly, and simply choosing the correct units. It takes skill to play that game, which the more intelligent people appreciate.
Lol, I wasted a lot of time on that.. oh well, hopefully I got my point across.




Thats good. The map should be easily picked up, but there is a significant difference between a master and a beginner.
Another good example is Uberena (I told you, I'm hooked). I picked up the basics in 10 seconds, but when I played with the other people who played it before I was last, and had maybe 1.5-2.5 times less points the the best player there (No, I was not far away from the next person, just last).


And don't forget that what different people think is 'fun' is usually different.
Most SEN members scoff at mass games (I do to most, but some of the more complex ones I like), but its the most popular game type out there..
Evolves, Golems, Ling blood, Madness, I can go on and on (I used to like ling blood and golems, but I stopped).