Quote:I'd been weighing various methods of how to vote and create a rating scale (much like ajmiam's) before voting started, and in the end, I came up with something much like his. However, there's a bit of an addendum I've added to mine, and I thought it was worth sharing because it's a reminder I've had to nail in my head since it's so easy to compare apples with oranges, and I fear that I'm not alone: a level deserving of a 5 should be exemplary in the context of what it sets out to be. I say this because after looking at CCLP3's voting results - and seeing how CCLP1's have been coming together so far - it seems like the levels that tend to hold the most universal appeal tend to fall into one of the following categories: [a] an epic campaign level, a level with a lot of variety, or [c] a level that truly "reinvents the wheel" or introduces some sort of revolutionary concept. We tend to stay away from or vote not quite as favorably on levels that feature some degree of homogeneity because, well...they just don't seem as interesting as levels that are "clever" or contain every game element. The irony is that if we were to assemble a set that featured only levels that fell into those three above categories, the set itself would be quite homogenous, which is pretty much one of the biggest qualms people have had about CCLP3.
So, from this point on, I'm trying to fight the urge to give that really-simple-and-easy-level-that-may-not-be-as-interesting-as-the-epic-campaign-level-but-is-still-the-best-level-it-could-be less than it deserves. It's not fair to compare levels that are two completely different types of animals with each other when both could be absolutely incredible in their own right, and I'm going to try to remember that as I continue to go through the packs, whether I'm dealing with a tutorial level, a beginning-tier challenge, a middle-difficulty romp, or a tough-but-fair puzzle.
I agree with your sentiments. Some levels I have voted really high even though were super easy because it did such a good job of what it set out to do. A level from Cardboard comes to mind: Chip's Most Dangerous Enemy. I think that's what it's called. It was a superb lesson on teeth monsters.
On the other hand, if I feel a level set out to be a lesson level fails at its objective, I will rate it lower than if it didn't give the impression of being such a level. Case and point, Right Roving Monsters. I thought it had the goal to be a lesson level but was all over the place, not having any clear objective besides fireballs and paramecia. And there were some concepts that were a little advanced for a lesson level, even for beginners as a group, I thought. Not to mention it took up so much space and did so little with it.
No offense to any who liked that level but this was just my opinion of course. I don't know who made either level, btw.
~Bowman
~Bowman