Custom Map #10956: Childish attempt at PAC 2. By: Martin Gronsdal

[Martin Gronsdal]

How come?

[goodyosef]

I have no idea what to think of this map.
I was all set to give it a 9/10, maybe higher, and then I discovered this maps little... idiosyncrasy. And had to do the map all over again, once I figured out from Martin's spoiler what the heck I was supposed to do. I'd tried to solve it myself, and even came up with the notion that maybe the whole map had to be flooded in anticreeper and wasted half an hour making that happen, only to discover I was wrong. And that peeved me. I'm happy to have a weird win-con need, in fact I think it's brilliant, but I could wish for a clue somewhere in the map to tip me off that shenanigans are going down, and what they might be. Even if it's subtle, and I only see the connection in retrospect. This felt more like a Shyamalan twist, where it's not actually necessary and no amount of clues were going to tell you it was coming.
   I also hated the fact that we don't find out we're wrong until it's too late to fix it. At least give us a chance to fix it without needing a save file or to replay the whole level!
   So, I loved 95% of this map experience, and the remaining 5% would have been *awesome* if I'd had any idea it was coming? I'm not necessarily hating on the idea, but some kind of "aha" moment based on clues and hints is more satisfying, IMHO...

[Martin Gronsdal]

Thanks for playing

[goodyosef]

Thanks for playing

Thanks for a cool map, man! I really liked how much strategy I had to use to work my way through the map. Lots of pausing and thinking for a second about my next move. So many PAC maps basically solve themselves after a few minutes, but this one kept me scheming right to the end. It's clever and interesting, and if we just had a little warning about your puzzle, it'd be an easy 9/10 or 10/10, which are ratings I almost never give!

Realized my first review might have come off a little focused on the negative, and wanted to be sure I offered praise for the awesomeness, not just complaints for the one Really Weird Part.

[Martin Gronsdal]

Thank you

[S-nut]

Same here: It's not cleverness when you can make a good puzzle map only with wired hidden rules, with now way to decue it with in the rules.

Changing rules and not giving hints about, its just simple minded.
 

[Martin Gronsdal]

May I suggest less unfriendly choice of words?

[S-nut]

May I suggest you bring an argument, if you can't find truth in it?! Its not unfriendly, ecept your subconscious agrees and your conscious get angry about.

[Karsten75]

I would like to remind all participants in this thread  of the following post that is pined at the top of this board.
https://knucklecracker.com/forums/index.php?topic=15512.0

For brevity's sake, here is the text of it. The highlighting I added

- Maps are made by the full spectrum of humanity.  From very young, to uh hmm very 'old'. From native English speakers to can't speak a word of English.  From experienced game players to casual and new as they come.

- Not every question requires a written answer.  No response is sometimes the best answer.

- Shower encouragement and praise on the things you like, ignore what you dislike.

- Constructive criticism is perfectly fine.

- Meta comments (comments on other people's comments) can often spiral away from map discussions.  Be cautious of topic drift.

- The above guidelines are not hard and fast rules, they are just guidelines designed to create a bias towards helping map makers make better maps.