[Sorry, but be prepared for a long post...]
Blondbeard wrote:
Well, I think that goes for the architects forum process as well. I felt pretty confident when the only person that had said anything about the second level semed to like it.
Actually, from the replies I can guess that "
the only person"
did like the hold. The problem being, vAmpir is a very good player who finishes holds in speeds like Stefan, which is probably something I want to be as well... Veteran players will see the first level and guess it's really easy... By the way, I gave a very high score for your hold, not because it deserved a very high score, but definitely higher than a 3 (a few days ago), because it is well written and very challenging.
And another problem is that it might be more fun to say something good than to say somthing bad about another players hold.
That is of course true, but testers usually comment on holds they like (or able to play) anyway. And I must say I did want to comment on your hold, but I had some very busy weeks lately. But if you still want my (very short) comments: well, level 1 was really fun. Level 2 was a bit too hard (for me) though. I guess, for your next hold, you might want to tune the difficulty jump a little bit more. But that's a purely a personal opinion. I'm sure many very good players will not agree with me.
Aim for fun, not difficulty?
It would really be kind of stupid to post a hold where my goal was to irritate people.
I wouldn't mind if a hold has a goal to "
irritate"
people, as long as it's really fun. There are easier holds that got a good rating -rowrow's hold for example- and they are usually very funny, but not irritating.
My intentions when I try to make a difficult room is that it should be fun to figure out how to solve it. That and that it shold leve a sense of satisfaction once youīve actually solved it. But I guess itīs not so easy to judge what it takes to make a pussle fun to solve.
Back to your hold, I think you actually did succeed in both of the points. The only problem is that, (and I'm a bit sutck in 1E in the second level), after doing the room for many times (and dying), I really don't want to go through doing the walking on the 200+ trapdoors again. Some checkpoints in that room could helped a lot.
Hmm. The conclusion is that I might have bypassed this problem if I had just waited for a little more opinions. Then I could have changed the boring rooms (hopefully not all). As it is now I have to curse my own eagerness to post the hold 
I am very sceptical that you will get more testers if you had waited a bit longer, since the hold is a bit hard. I do notice that the harder a hold is, the less reactions you will get. And, besides, you can still change the hold, but only specific rooms. But if a hold has challenging rooms, then it will be compared against those "
unreasonably hard without being fun to figure out"
-holds. If it wants to come out as the better ones, then it should try to be "
reasonably hard"
or "
fun to figure out"
. Personally, your first level succeed in both of them, and the second one is a bit too hard for me. But that's because I'm a lousy player.
Eytanz wrote:
I think the biggest problem with the rating system is that not enough people vote.
Absolutely! I think I will vote some more holds today I've already finished long ago. Tomb of Nomb for example, was a very fun hold, without the horrible difficulty I find in some other holds.
By the way, about the "
fun"
thing, I'm afraid it's very hard to answer what fun is. For example, there are a lot of people claiming they find my holds to be fun, but I never got the answer why that is. [Of course it might help if I ask that question first

]
-- Tim
[Edited by Tim at
Local Time:05-18-2005 at 10:01 AM: spelling]
____________________________
The best way to lose customers is to let little kids running loose on a forum with too many mod points.