DM-AkBal2k4
Map Info
	File Name akbal2k4.zip Author saroner Gametype UT2k4 Deathmatch Date Added 06-02-2004 File Version 1.00 File Size 0 kb Player Count 2-8 Map Description None Review Rating 6.5 User Rating 8 Overall Rating 7.5
Review
Reviewer Shadowlurker Awe Score:  1.5/3 Date 07-11-2004 Build Score:  2.5/3 Review Schema Cast Score:  2.5/3 User Point:  +1 Overall Score:  7.5/10 In Short: A gameplay orientated map that provides an open and flowing game. My first impression of this map was that it was average. It didn't look that great and it was very cubic. I nearly closed the map there and then, but I gave it a chance and though my opinion on the visuals did not change the gameplay was good enough to warrant it being kept on my hardrive. It looks very bsp based and cubic and whilst this may keep fps to a high it doesn't do the map any favours visually. The custom content is just a few stone carvings to give the map something different. These have been crafted well enough but they don't really do anything to improve the bland visuals. Saying that, it's not really that bad for the most part. It's atmospheric enough with the birds chirping and flowing water. Strangely enough the fire does not crackle - taking away from the mood and enviroment that isn't exactly great anyway. Everything is trimmed and nothing is horrible flawed, so it's not bad. Just nothing special. The gameplay is the map's strongpoint. Large enough for a decent team deathmatch, it has three levels of z-axis connected by ramps and lifts. It flows well, though in some places I felt that there were long stretches of nothingness. Aside from these places it is fast and fluid. You got your typical gameplay elements with sound cues from water and wood. Weapon placement is superb. You got the dangerous weapons down below and the less-useful one up top, forcing you to take risks. The author even attempted a trap on the shield but it's pretty useless. Still, nice to see an attempt. Bots play well. No FPS problems but then again it's not exactly a stunning map so blah. Not much more to say. I'd probably not suggest this map unless you were going to play a lot of deathmatch, but it's by no means a bad level.
Map Comments
D-7 06-02-2004 01:53 PM MDT Rating: 9   NC: 5 mirrors and only 1 works... Shame. Map: AWESOME. GET IT! question: where's the trigger for the spike-trap above the DD? Mangan: IMO the reason why the most used ratings are 6-9 is that people don't take the time to rate a crappy map, only good ones, to encourage others to DL. (The other extremity is 0-1, which is self-explaining, just from the other side: to prevent people to DL it) sandorski 06-02-2004 08:23 AM MDT Rating: 8   Very nice map. Recommended download mangan }swe{ 06-02-2004 09:10 AM MDT   im not blaming ppl rating this map high bcuz havent played it and therefor cant speak about its rating but i can hardly think its worth a rating of NINE!!! im just curious how come 70% of all the new maps at nalicity get a rating 8 or above i mean, i actually thaught that average was FIVE not EIGHT average means that if u add all the rating and then didvide it with as amny rating as there were u would get five but at this point i think u would 8 or seven now it just seems like a map is black or white either its 0 or ten but its not like that theres is normal maps in fact up to 30% of all the maps is fives (atleast imo)so plezz stop this overratingspree its not good for nc! if u dont believe maps are in fact overrated just look at the latest comments list it usually looks lik 9,9,8,7,8,6,9,8 i mean whats the really good maps worth if an average is eight?! Obi-Wan 06-02-2004 01:51 PM MDT Rating: 8   wow a 0 kb map! gotta try this! :D edit: played it,, and it's a great map! flow and layout are very good and the custom content looks great SilverDemon 06-02-2004 01:03 PM MDT   mangan }swe{, I always thought of the rating system as the grading system. I mean, come on. A 6 and below is an F, a 7 is a C, 8 B, 9 and 10 are As.. That's all there is to it, I think. When I see a 5 or a 6, I don't usually go for the download, and as I assume, a lot of people don't, either. Now, since this map earned a B, I think I'm gonna go download it.. :) Just my 2 cents. Peace. MichaelM 06-02-2004 01:50 PM MDT Rating: 9   I believe you should rate however you feel you should rate. If ypu really like the map, then give it a good rating. If not, don't download it, or comment however. However if you give a bad comment you should give reasons and explain why you don't like it so the author can improve upon it....... On the other hand 10s are for the maps like CBP2....hmmmm..... Anyway I really enjoy this map a lot, there is no lag on my machine. The architecture is well thought out and the new static meshes add a nice touch. I enjoyed this on UT2K3 , but I like this one better. Koveras 06-02-2004 07:26 PM MDT Rating: 7   wow a UT2004 map with good visuals and gameplay, quite rare Shadowlurker 06-04-2004 05:10 AM MDT   I'd just like to comment that no map should ever get a 10. No map is perfect. You can always improve it somewhere. Retails maps, on average IMO, would rate at 6.5 You get some, most of the ONS maps, most of the 1on1 maps etc. which would get 7s and 8s, but then you get DM-Serpentine which is a 2 and other such crap maps. Anything 6.5 or above is worth checking out IMO. Manticore 06-04-2004 07:54 AM MDT Rating: 6   ................................................ .............................................. ............................................ ....................................... Fliegenklatsche 07-11-2004 08:08 PM MDT Rating: 10   ....................... ......................... ........................... Virax 07-12-2004 03:32 PM MDT Rating: 9   Both flow and gameplay are both topnotch - it's an amazing map for TDM and FFA, though I haven't tried it in 1on1 yet. Might be a bit too large. AVA is absolutely awesome - the atmosphere is great, and I do believe this is the first time I've seen this particular theme. LIM 07-17-2004 02:52 PM MDT Rating: 7.5   I was kinda thinking ppl can trae a map whaever the heck they want to... I coulda sworn that's why it's called a User Score. You use the map then rate your experience with it. There are no rules governing what you have to consider or who's feeling you hurt in the process. (Just keep it mature, and constructive hopefully) Well I liked this map in that it felt like a bit higher quality than most maps that shipped with 2k3/4. I'm just not particular to open field combat. I like more tight corners in areas, and more z axis. Other than MY personal preferences this is quality mappage. :) redfist 08-18-2004 03:47 PM MDT Rating: 8   I couldnt have said it any better MAGMAN seems to me at nali a 5=8 and 3=7 and all the rest. For me a 7 should be the most one rates a map 8 9 and 10 are reserved for mappers who been around. and have somthing above and beyond the norm within the map.and looks dont cut it for me, I wanted to do more on it but held back,but oh well.I rated my DM-atrodeck2k4 a 6.5 A 10 for me was DM-Goose2k4,I'v rated only 3 or 4 above a 7.0 I kinda think ones who started out with ut2003 are the poisening of ,the map pool of coolness. Looks needs to blend in not meshed to death. DM action,and strategy. but most maps that look good, gameplay sucks. or good layout,look good,but runs slow. or looks bad, and plays good ,runs fast. Or any combination of that,any map above a 7 should have all good characteristics. Well i tried it and, one knows ware one is, on this map wich is good for playing.runs fast smooth,It could of been included in ut04 feels like stock map but better DM action than most stock or other maps. Allmost perfect size and openness,good mappage here. Bagh..chrome and curse Let me put it this way,when a favorite band plays your favorite song live at a concert,you want it the way it sounds on the radio,not all improvised to death (a redo).Also If effort don't count then that one cbp gets a 2 .And my Q1 levels were redone to keep quake1 recongnized thoughout the years.And not one of my maps deserves zeros. and the rating, is my true unbiased opinion of that atro2k4 map. Doriz 08-18-2004 02:21 PM MDT Rating: 7.5   Good map. i realy liked playing it. good lighting and a ok lay-out. this one is staying on my hard-drive @cursedsoul1 -BullsEyE- :) [Core]LIBB 08-01-2004 07:40 AM MDT Rating: 10   It's a breat map kurtloeffler 08-17-2004 01:32 AM MDT Rating: 7.5   i rember playing this for ut2003, the gameplay is very nice and it didnt look to bad, but this version looks like its alot more detailed. CursedSoul1 08-18-2004 11:52 AM MDT Rating: 7   @ redfist: you can make a map look like you want it to be, do you think anybody else cares that you wanted it to look like it does? we want some nice detail, good texture alighnment, some good sound usage, and one hell of a gameplay. recently there have been a lot of good maps submitted, and also the cbp's, and those had some amazing maps. sometimes the gameplay makes a map what it is, but we all want something to look at as well. only gameplay isnt enough, only decoration and nice looks isnt enough, it must be a well balanced mix of those 2. this map gets close, your maps on the other hand are way off. i wonder how long it will take you to finally get that redfist. ChromeBallz 08-18-2004 02:34 PM MDT Rating: 6   redfist, UT maps are rated for the UT standard, UT2k3/4 maps are rated bu the ut2k3/4 standard, it's that simple. No one rates a ut map low because it doesn't look good compared to ut2k3/4, they rate it low because it doesnt look good/play good in relation to other ut maps. Your quake conversions for ut didn't look good, let alone play good by the ut standards, that's why they were rated so low. Don't expect a high rating because it's a lot of work, or because it looks exactly the same as in the original game - the latter one actually insures the low rating. You don't get high ratings for copies, no matter how much work you put in them. Ratings are given for what the map is worth in UT, and NOT in comparison to the original. More importantly, don't rate your own maps. I hope you understand how that looks :/