News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register | Log in
·~¤ THE QUAKE AWARDS 2018-19 ¤~·
Hey guys.

I've started to organize some awards for our community. I've made a website over at Head on over and have a poke around.

In 13 days the nominations will open for all non beta maps released in 2017. There are a number of categories for maps, as well as a people's choice award.


looks cool, i kind of miss the "top 10" lists/polls that someone used to make (can't remember was it Quaddicted that made them?)

Since i can't keep track of all the maps nowadays, knowing the best ones to check out would be nice. 
Something to mirror the Cacowards of the Doom community will definitely attract more newcomers! 
Good Call Snaut. 
Lots to celebrate in the Q1 SP scene :) 
About Time 
I understand jizzles's apprehensions but I was thinking that something like this was overdue. A lot of newcomers to Doom usually turn to the Cacowards once they finish vanilla + Final Doom, and the Quake community could benefit from something similar.

Just something to consider: efforts should be made to draw attention to exceptional maps, not to elevate them to a legendary status while lesser maps fall by the wayside. Instead of a numbered top 10 list, maybe just present the cream of the crop but not necessarily in any particular order. 
#3 LOL 
But constructively, the nominations are too map centric.

There should be awards for tools, streamers, graphics, fan art, modeling, music, new progs, animation (I nominate shitting Ogre!) best Quake related Tweet, photchops, memes and so on. Something for everyone.

The catch-all category at the end of the page is too limited for a number of reasons. (you think maybe ericw has a shot at this one right?)

How hard would it be to add categories that move this beyond simply mapping? 
#6: Good idea, honestly. but I think it's also a good idea to limit the scope in someway as a test run of sorts. 
Looking at the award categories I get a feeling that most of the awards will go to experienced mappers. Since our community continues to grow every year something like Best Debut Map award would be nice. 
my concern is that there aren't enough "other things" released in a year in order to warrant categories of their own...

What I was planning on doing is having the judges write in-depth reviews of releases if there weren't enough nominations.

I can extend this idea to other content.

Interestingly I had more categories, but removed some of them after feedback. We can always grow the awards in future years. But lets try and keep it somewhat manageable in its inaugural year. 
Others have mentioned that as well, it's a great idea and I'll make sure there is something on the site to encourage newer mappers. 
#3 Can Fuck Right Off, Whoever They Are 
Pulsar is right about the best debut section, this is a great idea imo. There have been several excellent beginner maps that clearly deserve a spotlight. 
Can you please explain the methodology this will use? Now I am seeing "judges." If there are judges, how many, who are they? Does the community vote on narrowing the short list or on the finalists? How do ties work? 
Debut And Perhaps... 
Mapping experience brackets? Something like 0 to 2yrs, 3 to 5, 5 to 10, etc experience mapping for Quake (other games not counted, purely based on start date).

E.g., Award for Best in Class - Beginner, Midlevel, or Veteran mapper.

Tools don't get added often so not really workable to have one every year. Maybe like a best feature added or something.

I also agree that we need some sort of community plus moderator/judge voting scheme. 
No rankings. Trophies for everything including tweets. Everyone's a winner in this community! 
Alleviating Concerns 
It seems like there are some concerns, let me try and ease some of your worries.

I've thought a lot about biases and conflicts of interest. Here are the things that I'm planning to do to alleviate some of these.

There will be more than one set of judges, judges will not be allowed to vote on their own map.

One set of judges will shortlist, while another set will make decisions on the winners based on that shortlist.

The judges know, and I will be reminding them not to judge maps based on their personal opinion of the mapper. I don't think that any of the judges that I've chosen would do that.

The community won't explicitly be voting for maps, except for the people's choice award.

The part that the community plays in the awards is by nominating their favourite maps to the category that they think they best fit in.

I don't want to keep judges for consecutive years and as such, if one year we get judges that don't like a particular style of map, the next year those judges might have different opinions.

I've tried to get a variety of people to do the judging, we have mappers, content makers, players, and people who work as game devs.

I have set out a basic guide for the judges to follow, having said that, the judging will be qualitative, not quantitative... There is no likert scale for their scoring or anything. They will sit down, have a discussion about what they liked and what they didn't like, and how well the mapper / content maker executed their plans, and order the shortlisted maps accordingly.

Some people will be happy with the results, others will not. Unfortunately this is the way of awards. I have a group of people who I feel to be competent.

At the end of the day, if the public voting is important, maybe I can include the score that the maps received on quaddicted alongside the Judges opinions / verdict. 
@post 14 
I expected people to have varying opinions about this, he's entitled to ask questions. 
Oh another thing... I won't be judging on any of the maps myself. 
Thanks Snaught! 
good to know how this will work 
Seems to me there's two points at hand to be considered.

1. Obviously it's a good idea to hold some sort of annual awards for the best releases. (And if anybody thinks otherwise, their opinion might hold more weight if not posted anonymously.) Quake is slowly regaining mainstream momentum thanks to primarily SleepwalkR & ericw, and the dozens of mappers who turn up to chip away at brushes.

Holding "official" annual awards is a bang on idea to capitalise on this momentum and to push it further forward, and doing it in a similar style to the Cacowards (a panel of judges, each of them being in the panel for a good reason) lends credence to which releases were awarded.

2. If it's been mentioned that community won't explicitly be voting for maps, that implies the organiser has some sort of intrinsic Quake knowledge that the community at large does not; that they are better suited at picking the judges and categories than anybody else.

The Cacowards were first held by Scuba Steve (creator of Action Doom), now they're hosted by Linguica (Doomworld cofounder, doom_txt administrator). They're judged by exceptional reviewers (including the de facto Doom equivalent of TEAMShambler) and exceptional content creators. All is well there.

Will the Quake awards receive the same kind of credence with the current setup?

The award categories page splits maps into two categories, ones that run in DOS Quake and ones that require BSP2 support. How about all the maps that aren't BSP2 but require protocol 666 to run - aka nearly every single Q1SP from the past several years that wasn't made by negke? I'm not sure how it was possible to overlook that.

How about getting negke, Shambler, quakis, etc. on the panel? We're currently facing a problem where more people are making maps than there are playing maps, and getting actual reviewers to judge the maps would be good.

How about getting metl, Baker, dumptruck, etc. on the panel? Using this term lightly here but getting the "community leaders" involved would be the best way of giving credence to the awards.

How about getting Kinn, Tronyn, and other influential mappers/modders on the panel?

If there's going to be an official Quake awards "ceremony" it needs to be done right. I suppose metl's moving of this thread is further reaffirmed. ;-) 
Sorry Despite Posting Just After #3, I Missed It. 
Now gone. Completely wrong response to a typically positive contribution from Snaut.

I agree with a Debut category. 
my discord rumblings:

Clench Throckmorton - Today at 1:57 PM
Instead of just a "best map", i think instead we need two different but equally important categories for quake maps: "best gameplay", "best visuals"
it makes it more accesible to noobs and really just makes more sense
imagine a stunning art map but gameplay is just "ok" - you don't want this to win some "best map" award, you want it to win "best visuals" and then you have "best gameplay" to give to the olskool-looking map that is fun as fuck but ain't necessarily a looker
of course a single map can win both "best visuals" AND "best gameplay", like the oscars
Thanks for the feedback OTP, yeah... The limit to the bsp2 meant that protocol 666 was implied. That was my mistake for not mentioning it, the maps will have to load in dos / win / glquake for them to be eligible for the vanilla category.

In terms of the judges, I'm happy that I have competent people on board, not community leaders per-se, but people who are known and respected. Like I mentioned in the earlier post I plan on having different judges each year, to combat long term conflicts of interest and cliques forming. So perhaps next year I'll include some of the people you mentioned (if they're interested).

Also, this years awards should behave somewhat like a shakedown for next years awards. I don't expect to get it perfect from the start. We can look at the result at the end and make adjustments if need be.


I'm confused... There ARE categories for best visuals and best gameplay 
sorry i didn't look at your website.

I just assumed it was a placeholder and we were discussing the awards format here. But yeah, good call then. 
that post was based on a discussion I was having in discord before even seeing this thread, so I probably should have read the thread first too lol :) 
haha no worries 
Should Have A Better Name 
"The Quake Awards" is not as catchy as the Cacowards. Quakawards? idk 
Perhaps consider adding a section to acknowledge maybe 3 people who stepped forward to help out in the community in the current year who are brand new or started helping out.

Like didn't pritchard do an exceptional amount of bug reporting last year and finding some really obscure but eye-popping ones? For ericw tools, for my engine, probably other things.

And there might be someone relatively unknown that helps out with speedmapping or Quaddicted or edited the Quake wikia a ton that no one knows about or maybe someone who makes a tutorial or utility for a map editor.

One obvious example for this year would be dumptruck_ds, but while definitely not excluding highly visible heros, there have to be invisible ones or ones that have helped that don't get noticed.

When new people step forward and help out, makes things better.

/2 cents 
well I did consider calling them the Shubbies or Quaddies... I like the term "Pentagram of Perfection" for the overall award winner.

I'm happy for the community to come up with a catchy awards name. 
My Thoughts 
I kinda like the name Quaddies! But if I've understood correctly, these awards are only for the first Quake, right? So isn't the quad damage a little bit too inclusive for all the Quake games, since it's in all of them?

If we go with an award named after a cute iconic monster (like the Cacoward), there's really no substitute for the shambler! Besides the monster isn't included in the later games (if we don't count little cameos). Maybe they could simply be called the Shamblers (kinda like the Oscars) or Shambler awards?

However, when I really think about it, I'm not very keen on this whole award idea, in general. I'm afraid the Quake 1 community is just too small to prevent the clique of self-awarding from forming. Are there really enough judges to rotate between the years? Will the same funcies just keep awarding the same few funcies every year?

Either the awards would have to be awarded far less frequently (every 5 years??), or we should wait for the community to grow quite a bit more, or the other Quake games should be included to increase the pool to draw judges and nominees from. Just my two cents to add to Bakers'. 
The Shammies 
"Why'd they name it that, anyway?"
"Because the whole thing is a sham!"

"The Shammies? Like the things you use to clean up a spilled drink?"
"Too bad it can't clean up this mess of a thread!"
I dislike any Shambler reference... mainly because this isn't an exercise in egotism on my part and I'd rather people didn't misconstrue it that way. 
The Gold Ones 
Henceforth, thou shall be known as Cthton-Naut. 
Oooh Oooh 
The Golden Spawn Awards (aka "The Golden Spawns")

Only because I realised this works pretty well: 
Film: Oscars

Quake: Ospawns 
this isn't an exercise in egotism on my part 
You Can't Tell The Difference 
+1 For Golden Spawn 
:) That prize, seriously man... Goldplated. 
FYI for y'all who haven't clicked through to the site yet: snaut is also posting some short retrospectives of past cool maps. I like reading 'em.

Thumbs up to the idea of an awards site as a way to give more attention to great Quake stuff. Any particular person getting a "virtual trophy" is fine, whatever, but the best part is making a collection of awesomeness that other folks can see. I mentioned elsewhere that I love the Cacowards both as a way to find maps to play and as a general celebration of fantastic Doom work still being done in the 21st century, so I'm perfectly ok with the idea of Quake trying to have something similar.

I think it can be done well and not divisively. (I do like the idea of rewarding some set of maps rather than a specific ranking.) Of course nothing from me is up for consideration here so I'm just speaking as a spectator. 
None of the shambler-reference suggestions are made because a user named Shamblernaut started this. They come to mind, because the Shambler is the most iconic monsters from Quake; much like the Cacodemon is in Doom. It makes sense to use a name like that for its iconic value alone. Quake Awards sounds very generic, and some of the other names suggested here are downright terrible. 
I agree with the post above. Shambler is a name that immediately evokes Quake 1, while Spawn reminds me of that comic book superhero :P 
Yeah, the Shambler is the perfect mascot. Would kill any confusion people had about which quake game the awards were for. 
BTW, I know this was discussed above but I'm not 100% sure that the point came across or what the resolution was...

There are a lot of maps that fit in neither of the two "best map" award categories as currently described. I.e. maps that neither are vanilla-compatible nor do they user BSP2.

One of these categories should be reworded so that it is just "everything that doesn't fit in the other category". 
I'll change it to "not vanilla compatible" 
I Don't Like The Idea 
By having what sounds like "the quake community awards as organized and voted on by the quake community" - you are basically turning what is currently a small user-base, pretty chilled-out hobby into a competition. Now, every single release a mapper puts out is essentially going to be considered a competition entry, whether they like it or not.

Is Mapper A better than Mapper B? I guess we'll know officially now! The judges have spoken! Awww, didn't make the grade? better luck next year (scratch my back and I'll scratch yours, if you know what I mean, wink wink!)

Mappers outnumber non-mappers like 10-1 here, so I can't see how this can be anything other than an exercise in self-promotion, with probably equal amounts of favoritism and ostracism going on. 
Thank You #49 
I'm not afraid to go on record as being uncomfortable with the process. The idea of the awards is great. I am aware of who the judges are and I do agree that they are a good selection. I also know that Shamblernaut has nothing but good will here and he wants to strengthen the Quake community.

I get all of it.

There is a continent of people in the community that abhor the negativity in parts of this community and want to mitigate it in their own way.

I get that too.

But I also have the experience of just having participated in the 100b4 jam and what #49 says in his post is pretty much spot on for that experience. If I had known the maps were going to be ranked, I would not have participated in that event. I guess I wasn't around for 100b 1-3 to know how this worked going in. I just figured there would be a first prize map and everyone else had the honor of participating. Instead we had a new mapper from a different community come in dead last with a map that followed the rules to a T and had a wonderful aesthetic. But it featured trick jumping.

So now with this award, a small subset of that community will be selecting, ranking and awarding "bests". That's not a community award that's a small group of "influencers" giving their opinions at best. Good people, no doubt - but it doesn't matter who it is: ranking creative endeavors with participants of varying skill levels is wrong minded in my book.

My real concern is that this was just decided upon announced - and not brought up to the community for input from the start. At least not here.

So I am uncomfortable I think for good reason. But I would guess I am in the minority. I fully expect a torrent of anonymous taunts and ridicule from this post but fuck it - hitting submit. 
Thanks Dumptruck 
Any competition like this MUST be "opt-in". The competition is announced, and mappers themselves decide whether they want to submit an entry (or a number of entries).

Call me a snowflake, but I just want to carry on making things for quake and not feel like I'm being ranked and rated against all the other mappers, in some official way. That sounds like the opposite of fun. 
Maybe that's what's meant by Nominations (on the website), but it doesn't give much detail.

Does the map author have the sole authority to nominate their own maps? Or can anyone nominate anyone elses? It needs to clarify.

Obviously the former is how I think it should work. 
Let me preface this by saying that you shouldn't have any concerns regarding posting with your nickname. You're entitled to hold your opinions and because you discussed it sincerely you'll get a sincere answer. If you share a worry with dumptruck about anon trolls by using your account, I would emphasise that nobody here really cares for that kind of behaviour.

Anyway, addressing your concerns as best I can:

1. I have gone to (I think) reasonable lengths to eliminate long term bias (with the award setup there may well be individual year bias, but I think that's pretty unavoidable). Have you read the things that I plan on doing?

2. If somebody makes something that people (and judges) like, then they deserve to win and be recognised for that. All this does is recognise it with a little pomp and ceremony. Map rankings are already available on Quaddicted, it would be quite easy to look at that and claim that some mappers are better than others. Winning an award doesn't mean that one person is a better or worse mapper than another, it just means that for that particular release, they did a better job (in the opinion of a few people).

3. These mappers are adults. I'm sure they can handle it if somebody makes a "better" map than them. I know there are already a lot of mappers that are better than me. Should I let that bother me? I can use it in order to have something to gauge my skills against. I can use it to improve.

@Dumptruck Fair concern regarding lack of input. The discussions regarding the awards were held with various people in private, not in public. My concern with things being held in public is that design by committee often becomes unmanageable. But I do see your point. I was already debating whether to rank the shortlisted maps or not... I think a winner and a bunch of unranked runners up works fine too.

"ranking creative endeavours with participants of varying skill levels is wrong minded in my book"

I can't help but feel that with this opinion, no matter what I say you won't be OK with awards from this community.

I guess your concern is that the community will tear itself to pieces over these awards? While I expect there will be some friction, I doubt that it will be serious enough to do long term damage to the community.

Honestly I don't think I can say much more than this. If you guys have concerns over the way its run or practical suggestions that I might be able to implement, then please make them heard.

I can't guarantee that I'll agree or implement them, but without being made aware of concerns nothing is likely to change. 
Regarding Opt In 
when the shortlist is announced you can opt out and somebody else can be moved into the shortlist. 
Go Map 
Unless we're having "Top 10 stinkers of 2018" what's the fuss about? We'll have a small selection of maps maps deemed worthy of special mention and that's about it. I'm failing to see the negatives. More hype and exposure for quake, plus extra stimulation for mappers to make and release cool maps. 
While I expect there will be some friction, I doubt that it will be serious enough to do long term damage to the community.

I agree.

And I should have added: "ranking creative endeavours with participants of varying skill levels [by a small group of individuals] is wrong minded..."

The Quaddicted comparison doesn't work for me here. If you rank a map in that context it's as valid as the next person's opinion. These Awards are speaking for an entire community.

I am still going to be supportive of these awards in the long run because I respect the people who are involved enough to give them a fair shot at this.

And the retrospectives on the site are great. 
The fuss is over the details not the overall concept. 
(btw dumptruck)

there was never any intention to rank maps first to last like the 100b comp 
for the clarification. 
Yeah I don't really see the issue with "every map is now part of a competition". Maybe I just can't personally understand the mindset that the existence of an end-of-year best-of list compiled by a handful of people would be such a huge deal that it might discourage someone from mapping *at all*. On the contrary, it might encourage people to learn to map and put in their best work. And anyway, how is the mere potential of not winning an award (that might be months and months off) more off-putting than possibly getting poor ratings on Quaddicted or comments like "your map is shit"? It's worth noting that some people cannot even handle constructive criticism.

The whole concept just seems incredibly useful, like how the Cacowards are a useful (but by no means exhaustive).

I do prefer the Cacowards format of having an unranked list, though.

I don't like the idea of the awards being opt-in. If the Shammies are intended to highlight some peoples' idea of the best maps of the year that should be what it's about. If people want to opt out that's fine but why would we punish someone who just released their map without paying enough attention to the whole community to have learned that the awards exist AND that they must opt in? I've been compiling my own private "top 10 of the year" Quake lists for the past two years and I've never had trouble filling it up. If you want that kind of trouble, narrowing your choices to a self-selected pool seems like a great way to do it.

As a final note, these kinds of awards are going to be biased. They will never not be biased. Clique-ness could be mitigated by allowing people to nominate releases for consideration (so the judges don't overlook things they might otherwise), which is how the Cacowards handle it, as long as this is advertised on multiple forums... but I'm sure Shamblernaut has alreay thought of that. The alternative (aside from abandoning the idea) would be to have any who wants to vote make a list and then aggregate those lists somehow, but aggregate data has its own problems imo. 
I posted the above before dumptruck's subsequent replies clarifying his position, so much of what I said is not relevant. I stand by my position though. It seems to me that an end-of-year list compiled by a few people does not, by definition, "stand for" the community. Maybe people will feel like it does, idk. 
*before I read dumptruck's replies 
There once were map review sites that were helpful in finding rare gems to play.

Spirit used to have a poll at Quaddicted at the end of the year where you could vote for the best maps.

Ranking maps isn't something new.

It is something old that needs to be resumed. 
Ooh Look A Cool New Map/mod 
Oh wait are you guys talking about the Shambler Awards? Been wanting one of those for ages. Um let's see, complaints here, good ideas there and there ... yup what Baker said. But mostly I just see this as a way to motivate mappers and get moar maps.

Off to see what goodies are in Ontranto. 
When will you be announcing who the judges are? It seems like you have already picked them, going by your mentioning of "I have competent people on board". Will the competitors know who will be judging their work when the competition opens?

Also, (for each category) are all the entries going to be ranked, or just an overall winner picked from a pool of otherwise equals?

Good to know you can opt-out. I think there's quite a few hobbyists in this community who don't want everything to be turned into a deathmatch. 
I'll be making a page on the site before the nominations close with some judge profiles. I was waiting to clear with them that they were all happy to be publicly known as judges. The concern of course is they they might get some heat if they pick maps that others don't like or don't pick a map that somebody else does like.

The categories will have an overall winner, two runners up and honorable mentions. If there aren't enough nominations for a winner / runners up, then the judges will make a small showcase showing off the nominated maps. 
I think most people are missing the point of the Awards. They are not for mappers, they are for new players! We have always had more (active) content creators than players and an award ceremony will give new players a chance to play the latest/greatest and hopefully move on to other content once finished.

Something like this will certainly upset a few people and even though we might not intend it, we all compete with each other to create the greatest maps we can. When I started the jam events I wanted them to be just a friend thing, but there is countless people in the community declaring winners of them!

As a community we have been judging maps for a long time. Pay a visit to Quaddicted and you will see plenty of people voting up/down, people trying to "fix" the top 10 list and people posting constructive/insults whether we like it or not.

I think everyone has to accept the Award process and if there are problems, try to be constructive and fix it for the next year. Regardless if individuals are upset, this will be a good thing overall for the community. We need more people to see the work that people (here) spend weeks/months creating and hopefully enjoy it. 
+1 to this being for players. I don't regularly peruse Doomworld, but when I am in the mood to play it, I hit up the Cacowards because I know I will quickly find something good to play. Quake would benefit from that. 
I want to agree with what sock and others have said in that the value of this type of thing is increased visiblity of awesome work, and celebrating what our community can make, not stroking egos or making people who didn't "win" feel excluded.

Some things I feel would help with that are:

- focus on the map, not the mapper. The map wins the award, not the person. Of course the mapper can be named but as a secondary detail.

- don't create rankings that make people feel singled out as losers. Having a top 10 and then everyone else is better than ranking everyone down to last place at #47. And, if there are only 13 entries, a top 10 implicitly singles out the bottom 3. So then you should have a top 5 or fewer.

- public voting instead of judges would make things feel more democratic, even well-meaning judges increase a feeling of an "in-group" that rewards other in-group people. (I realize public voting creates problems with verifying votes.)

I do like the idea of also honoring people too, those that did a lot of work for the community in other ways like streaming, releasing tools, making tutorials, writing long comments or recording demos for every map. This type of award shouldn't feel like a ranking, more like "here are some cool people that contributed in various ways" -- instead of "best streamer." Again, if it appears that not being chosen is an insult, then there is a problem. There should be a feeling of "there are lots of good people doing valuable work, we picked only 5 to honor, but those not chosen are also doing valuable work." 
I Think We're Getting Somewhere 
Great input all around but especially #69 above from metlslime. I agree that the community should have more of a role than just nominating. Maybe next year?

And thank you Shamblernaut for the updates and clarifications. 
focus on the map, not the mapper. The map wins the award, not the person. Of course the mapper can be named but as a secondary detail.

This was always going to be the case.

don't create rankings that make people feel singled out as losers.

I've mentioned numerous times now that this isn't going to be the case

public voting instead of judges would make things feel more democratic

Regarding community participation, there is already a people's favourite award.

and again, I've taken numerous steps to make sure long term bias and conflicts of interest aren't long term. I really can't do much more than that. Also please read posts #15 and #17, this might help with some of your concerns regarding "in-group"-ness

I could allow in the future the community to shortlist, but any more than that and the awards become either unmanagable or another Quaddicted.... And Quaddicted is doing a great job, I don't want to make a clone of them, or step on any toes.

One thing that the judges do is differentiate these from the user scores on Quaddicted. Perhaps we can do a vote on each category alongside the judges comments next year.

here are some cool people that contributed in various ways

This was suggested to me very early on and I agreed with the suggestion then, there will be a page to thank community contributors. It's not on the site because it's not an award, same with new mapper highlights. 
I also should have acknowledged that you are already doing some of the things I said. I think those things i mentioned, that you are already doing, directly address the criticisms upthread. Really the only one you are not doing is open voting, and I can see the reasons (but it still has the negative I mentioned.)

BTW I believe a one-time vote would still be different from Quaddicted because it collects ratings over a large period of time, during which people's standards change, and during which the field of competing maps is ever-changing, and from users who have only been exposed to a subset of maps. A one-time vote would have a defined list of maps that all voters see, and their opinions are collected in a small space of time. 
Would this also be a good website to include a counter on the main page for number of maps released year to date in 2018 with a note like Updated on 6/28/2018 since it most likely wouldn't get updated every day? 
Thank you for the review. Most of all, I'm glad you liked the level. Gonna brag about it if you don't mind. 
Hey nominations appear to be open. (Now I just need to figure out which releases were vanilla-compatible, hmm.) 
vanilla compat aka negke maps 
Negke Wins Teh H4x Category 
Good Points 
#49 and #50 make some really good points. Dumptruck articulated his argument really well. Snaut is an upstanding guy who clearly has only good intentions, namely to bring attention to excellent maps. I agree that it sounds like a good concept.

I didn't even participate in 100b4 and I still didn't appreciate that every map was ranked. It gave the impression that some maps were cast aside when they were really phenomenal. If a map is really exceptional, then it is likely to get attention without the backing of an award.

Some people also have very harsh words to say about some maps. Personal qualms can lead to unsubstantiated negative reviews. The rating system on quaddicted had stood out to me in particular for this. Good thing I don't let ratings influence my decision to play a map but if the Quake Awards takes off, it will be used as a filter by newcomers when deciding which maps to play and which ones to ignore.

I don't want to influence anything regarding this either way but I had to chime in after 49 and 50 made some solid points. 
get those nominations in guys :)

remember nominations are from 2017 only... so for whoever just nominated 1000 cuts.... I'm sorry it's ineligible this year 
...state it and judge against it. The best comps and review sites in this community have played by this rule. 
Says nominations close on the 14th (Saturday)... does that mean we can still get in some noms during the 14th? 
Something About Mid-day On That Date 
I saw this somewhere. 
eep. I hope there's some slack. 
Is the problem that you've not played the 2017 maps yet? or that you won't have time to nominate them at all? 
Hahah. There's only so fast that I can hammer on that submit button, geez!

More seriously: Yeah I was using this as an opportunity to check out some good ones that I missed. Still have a half-dozen or so to go, but I need to attend to some family birthday party stuff tonight instead of vidya games.

No worries. I got some good nominations in there! 
Most maps from 2017 have been nominated for one award or another.

If you're worried about maps missing out, it's unlikely. 

Voting for the people's choice awards is up...
and the shortlist has been published.
Remember to get in and have your say :) 
I Can't See The Full List? 
I only see a Conspiracy of Cartograp

Tried clicking all over it in case I didn't have the full page open in the hopes that was just a screenshot snippet of the list, but no luck. Desktop shows a few more choices but still cut off. 
Weird... Thanks For The Heads Up 
Direct link to the form. 
For the People's Choice Awards (Award? Awards?) I'm seeing a giant list of all the maps and I can only choose one. Is that as expected or is it supposed to be per-category? 
yeah, vote for your favourite of all the maps nominated.

its a category unto itself, the other categories have judges

this lets the people have their say regarding which map they thought was best 
OK. And I noticed on further looking that the PCA list is actually bigger than the "shortlist" group, which is nice.

I do feel BTW that the shortlists coulda/shoulda been not quite so short. I'm curious about a couple of things & hopefully once all this is tied up y'all will be willing to do a bit of postmortem chat. 
I Guess The Name Quake Awards Has Stuck? 
It kinda rhymes with Cacowards so I suppose it has a nice familiar ring to it. 
I really don't think having only one vote for the People's Choice Awards is a good idea at all
First of all that category should have the same sub-categories as the judge's nominations, and second you should be able to select more than one map. The winner for each sub-category should obviously be the map that received the most votes, but there could be runner-ups as well (maybe two of them).

As it as the moment, I have no desire to vote because I can only choose one map. Why even bother? 
...may one vote if one hasn't played ALL maps released in 2017 yet? I did play most of them up to early October, there's one that stands out quite tall above the rest IMHO and I highly doubt it's gonna get dethroned by a late map. 
I Think You're Good To Go ;) 
I've only played six (!) maps from early 2017, so I don't consider myself eligible to vote, though. 
WTF Google Account?! 
Isn't it enough to sign in & log in? I don't want Google to monitor my online activity... 
I haven't checked the retain information of submitters option for the google form, so at the very least I don't track that stuff... I'm not sure if I can say the same for google itself.

The reason why I used google forms is it's super simple to set up. I could allow anonymous voting, but the requirement to sign in via a google account prevents serious voting abuse. Otherwise it would be crazy easy to vote a million times for one map. 
Otherwise it would be crazy easy to vote a million times for one map.
Yeah, I can appreciate that. You don't want the QuakeAwards to become The Voice... Oh well, I guess I can create a Google account to use only for this. 
One of the fun things about this was that it got me to play or re-play several 2017 maps and really think about what I liked about them.

The website says that the winners will be revealed tomorrow, and they'll get their well-deserved moment in the spotlight. Before then though, I'd like to call out a few other maps that didn't make the shortlists.

Hopefully this is taken in the spirit it's intended; I want to give props to some more good work, and no shade intended toward anything else.

First of all, Retro Jam 6 was a fantastic release. So much good stuff in there! I would particularly highlight retrojam6_mukor (Sacrifice Unto Sebek), for both looking and playing great. Visually I might give this the edge over the actually-nominated mukor map, and I had a lot of fun with the pacing and variety of the map & the way the routes criss-crossed back over the main areas in different ways.

Map Jam 9 was another killer collection, and I want to give a nod to jam9_shotro (Ruins of the Elder God) in the "oddball" category. I know some folks just won't get on with the "retreading" involved in playing all the way through this map, but it was a cool ambitious idea, and for me it worked and was fascinating to play.

While I'm here I'll mention that I gave ad_sepulcher a nom for best visuals (along with the rest of its nominations haul). Just the initial view alone gets it there IMO, and it's dripping in atmosphere.

Finally megad2lvl3 (Wenl Mine) had some terrific classic fighting and exploring. I wasn't sure how much the gameplay category was intended be about innovation, but this map was super solid in a good ol' familiar way. And like any good map it has a few clever setpieces or other touches that give it character.

Was a good year. 
Wenl Mine was a great one, good call. Don't forget the awesome moving geometry in the endgame.

Looking forward to seeing the winners! In the meantime, good call on posting judge interviews. Reminds me of the old mapper interviews on Quaddicted. 
I Suppose I Ain't Gonna Vote, Then... 
Oh well, I guess I can create a Google account
Nope nopey nopes. These wankers ask for a phone number so they can send me a text message. Ha ha. Very funny, guys. Even if my phone wasn't currently dead, I certainly wouldn't give Google my personal phone number. They can go fuck themselves with a dirty toilet brush. 
You can click skip 
No I Can't 
They insist on wanting my number. 
Mugwump, Let Me Know Your Vote 
and I'll add it to the total at the end 
Forgotten Sepulcher 
What else? Thanks Snaut. 
The awards are up guys, go check em out :) 
Thanks For The Heads-up! 
All winners truly deserve it. Congrats y'all! I coincidentally discovered Bal's map yesterday and it is fantastic!

BTW, does Bal always speak of himself in the 3rd person? xD

I would have liked to have the judges' names appended to "judge 1, judge 2, judge 3".

I'm quite surprised that Sepulcher won the people's choice with only 26% of the votes. I thought it would be a landslide! Can you please inform us on how the votes were distributed for this category? I'd like to know the percentage of votes for each map.

I have a suggestion for the 2019 awards: a mapper should only be nominated once per category. As it is, vanilla has MissBubbles nominated twice and even worse, gameplay is split between Sock, Giftmacher and... Giftmacher+Sock! 
Hey Mugwump 
Yeah, unfortunately there wasn't much engagement with the voting, I chalk that down to

1. my website and how poor it was for mobiles
2. the choice to use google forms
3. people having run out of steam for the awards once the voting came around.

Next time I think it would be better to open up the voting to all the maps released in the previous year. OTP suggested this in a previous discussion with him, however I wanted people to engage with the nominations, so the "your map will only be eligible for the people's choice award if it is nominated for a category" was to get people to engage with the categories and maybe this worked, because there were a heap of nominations. Lots of doubles too.

There were lots of individual votes for maps, and only a handful of maps got more than a single vote.

During discussions early on people made it pretty clear that they wanted the focus to be on the maps, not the mappers. So at the time I wasn't too fussed about some mappers getting more than one map in. I didn't want to have too much oversight over what maps went where as I'm attached to this project long term and don't want too many accusations of bias or cronyism. So when it came to choosing the maps, all I did was shuffle things in spreadsheets once the judges had chosen the shortlist. In hindsight I could have made that an explicit rule.

It does beg the question though, do we want to primarily reward the map? or the mapper?

Anyway, all this aside, I plan on having a debrief thread here on func in about a week, once the dust has settled a little. I can post the percentages of the votes at that point too. If you think of anything else you want to raise, that would be a great time to do it... or, raise it here in the meantime and I'll post the best answer I can then :)


It does beg the question though, do we want to primarily reward the map? or the mapper?
Fair point. You made it abundantly clear that the focus was on the maps. Yet, having the same people more than once per category seems odd to me. I'd like to know where others stand on this, if any of you guys feel like chiming in.

If you think of anything else
Nope, that's pretty much it for now. If I do, I'll make sure to let you know. 
I'd say it's good to focus on the maps. The main purpose of the awards IMO is to show players some good stuff to experience. The fact that the author gets kudos is nice but not the main thing. We shouldn't artificially discard some maps just because an author made a lot of good ones that year. 
btw if you want to submit a news post for the results, that would be great. 
Quite honored, Thanks guys!
Away on vacation these days, cool surprise. Congrats to all the winners, finalists, and organizers! 
Make it more user friendly next time? I went to the website 3 or 4 times and every time it was just a bunch of empty pages saying something was coming soon. I have no idea where nominations or votes were supposed to take place. 
Awards Debrief 
Hey Guys,

Let me just start by saying thanks for all the support you guys have given and the interaction with the process. It was really good to see so many nominations roll in and seeing your comments here has been awesome.

From very early on it was suggested to me that I use this years awards as a dry run for next year. As a first iteration I think things went fairly well, I learned a lot about what I think need to happen to make it run better next year.

I'll start the ball rolling with known problems with the process.

Lack of specific description around what exactly constitutes certain categories. This ended up hurting one particular mapper who had a very good chance of winning that category. Unfortunately my error was pointed out to me after we had already published the shortlist, and because of this he missed out.

Lack of testing UX for the website. I made the (incorrect) assumption that the links (and scrolling) on the website would work as well as it did in the mobile preview of my browser. My choice in theme wasn't great either.

Engagement. As I mentioned in post 109 engagement with the voting was down as compared to the nominations. It was good to see a variety of votes, but the margin of the winner was not what I expected. I'll publish the votes below.

Other issues that have been raised.

The landing page for the website not being clear enough with conveying the information that the user needs. (post #114)

Not having named the comments against the judges. (post #108)

The requirement for a google account for voting. (post #97)

Voting on one category rather than multiple for people's choice awards. (post #94)

Too short shortlist (post #92)

A counter on the website (post #73)

Everything before this seems to be ok / settled. So that's enough for post 1. Next post will be addressing some of this stuff. 
Post 2 
So let me post my plan for solving some of the problems.

Probably the biggest thing initially would be to get more experienced people on board. I need people with the following skill sets.

Somebody who would like to run outreach or social media. I tweeted out a bit, but didn't engage with other forms of media, this would probably be helpful.
Somebody with css and/or design skills to improve the website.
Somebody to help me with writing reviews / descriptions.

Regarding the names of the judges against the comments. I can change this in the future, but the reason why I did this was to have the opinions of the judges assessed as an aggregate, so if they receive any "hate" from anyone it would be directed at the group rather than any one individual. I'd rather not change it, and would probably only do so if there was overwhelming community support for this change.

For next years award I'll look for a better solution than having a google account for voting. It was quick, easy and "fit for purpose", but I underestimated the reluctance for people to use it. This could have contributed to the low People's Choice Award engagement.

Multiple categories for People's Choice Award(s). So I wanted to keep the scope of the website awards small, initially I only wanted to include the people's choice to minimise potential "hate" being posted toward the judges. The idea being that if people are unhappy, they can still have their say.

I'm willing to include more categories for the people's choice in the future, but I would like to hear from you guys regarding this. With more people on board helping me it should be easier, but I still want to keep the scope of the site manageable. Would you guys like more people's choice categories? If so how would you like to see them implemented?

Regarding too short of a shortlist, I tried to keep the shortlist fairly short so that there would be the two runners up and a winner. Either way, the judges need to cull the maps down from the nominations list to a shortlist. The only person that this really makes more work for is whoever is writing the previews (in this years case, me). So I'm not particularly opposed to making it longer, so long as there is somebody else on board to help me write up the website. Again if we could get discussion regarding this below.

Finally, the breakdown of votes for the maps:

The Forgotten Sepulcher - Sock, 6 votes
Mensis Keep - Breezeep, 3 votes
A Conspiracy of Cartographers - Kell, 2 votes
Shattered Soul of the Scarabrus - Orl, 2 votes
Wenl Mine - Megaman, 2 votes
The Pillar - Pritchard
A Warm Welcome Home - Bal
Blastocyst - Orl
Chasing Promises - Skacky
Manchester's Leftovers - Daya
Nyarlathotep's Sand Castle - Sock
Sacrifice Unto Serek - Muk0r
Temple of Azathoth - Yuki Raven

Thanks guys,

I look forward to hearing your feedback 
First off: good job. The winners are excellent maps, and so are the others that were highlighted in various ways on the site.

Judged awards come down to taste and different folks will have different ideas about what the winners should be, but I don't have much about the results per se that I would feel like griping about. I guess I'll mention that I do think it's crazy -- like bark-at-the-moon gnaw-your-own-toes Crazy -- that Sepulcher didn't compete for best visuals. But otherwise, super reasonable picks.

Comments about stuff other than specific results:

1) I'm the guy (or one of the guys) that mentioned that the shortlists were too short. Also I don't think there was a clear distinction between "shortlist" and "honorable mention". Both problems could be solved by combining those lists. I doubt that anyone cares about how many "runners-up" there are in a category. Or at least, speaking only for myself, I just want to see good stuff recognized and it is also nice to have one of those picked out as the best. The size of the shortlist would ideally be driven by where a "quality dropoff" is more than by a set number.

2) The vanilla-compatible category had problems. IMO there shouldn't be a category driven by technical concerns, as that makes things harder for the judges and the audience probably isn't concerned about that. A "vanilla feel" or "classic" category that goes purely on aesthetics could be better.

3) "Best gameplay" was also sort of a headscratcher for me, when nominating stuff. "Gameplay" is a vague term, and maps can excel in many different ways. E.g. exploration, combat setup, puzzles, or new mechanics introduced in a mod. In the end IMO this makes the category so broad that picking one winner feels arbitrary. Maybe there's a way to split this up, not sure. Classic vs. experimental, or combat vs. exploration, or ... anything that makes the category smaller.

4) I really liked having the various posts on the site about things other than the pure results. I don't think I have any constructive criticism about the site here -- obviously the presentation could be better in some ways, which is true of about any website, but I don't have a silver bullet change to recommend. 
Oh, and about the people's choice thing:

Personally having only one award there didn't bother me a lot; I was just initially confused/surprised since it had been called "people's choice awards".

With the tiny shortlists I did feel like having a people's choice vote in each category would be one way to recognize more of the best maps. If the shortlists are larger that might be less of a motivation. 
About Voting Activity 
After having seen the low amount of votes, I think it might be wise to keep just a single category until we see an increase in voting activity.

Personally, I didn't vote because I hadn't had time to play hardly any maps from 2017. Otherwise I would've voted.

So, maybe next year concentrate on reaching out to people first etc. and if those measures increase voting activity to high enough levels to warrant more voting categories, they can then be added next year. 
Wait... if my math is right, there were only 23 votes for the people's choice?! I know the Quake community has become quite small over the years, but damn! As you're very much aware, your social networking skills leave a lot to be desired. For next year, I hope you find the right guy for that because you seriously need to rally the troops and probably go about it way more in advance. Did you even post at QuakeOne and other dedicated sites? Other id games' communities might be interested in participating too, so don't forget to post at Doomworld et al. You may also need to form a partnership with QuakeCon or something (does QExpo still exist? I can't find any reference of it beyond 2016). It would surely bring more exposure to the awards.

Regarding the names of the judges against the comments.
I understand your reasons for not disclosing them but they said pretty interesting things and I would have liked to know which comment belonged to whom (maybe you could share the info privately? I promise there's no hate mail to be received from me). I trust that the judges know enough of how the occasional troll/hate posting goes around here to be able to get over it. At any rate, you should ask them how they feel about appending their names to their comments...

I'm willing to include more categories for the people's choice in the future
I'm having mixed feelings about this. On one hand, I agree with Johnny Law that ideally there should be a people's choice in each category but on the other hand, Esrael has a point. Let's keep a single people's choice for QAwards 2019 and, if participation increases significantly, then you can implement Johnny's one-people's-choice-per-category for QAwards 2020. 
Oh, One More Thing... 
Sorry for double-posting but this literally hit me just a few seconds after I clicked on "submit"...

About rallying the troops, I wanted to add that you may wanna ask ArrCeee and other prominent Q1 youtubers to do some promotion for the awards. 
I didn't vote for the peoples' choice awards because there was absolutely zero incentive for me to do so, and I suspect it was the same thing for a lot of people. When you have a list of 70 maps that are entirely different from one another, no categories, only one map selectable and only one winner with no runner ups then there really is no point in voting at all because we all knew which map was going to win. This award was utterly pointless as it was. Not surprised with this turnout if these numbers are indeed for this award.

I definitely think that:
1- There needs to be the exact same categories as the judges' awards for the peoples' choice awards.
2- People should be allowed to vote for more than one map per category, the winner being the map that receives the most votes. 
Beg To Differ 
People should be allowed to vote for more than one map per category, the winner being the map that receives the most votes.
I don't think emulating The Voice is a viable option: maps will then not win on their own merits but on the size of the mappers' social networks. 
Before skacky's comment is dismissed with "uuuhh... dont complain... *drools* if you didnt vote..." - I agree 100%, and I voted!!! 
Classic otp putting words in peoples mouths. Never change, friend! 
My Bad. 
He certainly never, ever said those exact words on the quake awards channel of the episode jam Discord, my mistake. 
Before this turns into a shitshow I'd like to ask that people keep this civil and that we keep the suggestions practical.

@post 125, I probably did say that. And the intent is to use "negative reinforcement" to get people to engage with voting. It's effectively the same thing as saying "you gotta be in it to win it".

I'm not going to dismiss Skacky's opinion over a flippant comment.

Skacky, the focus on the awards (for me at least) was the judging by the judges. The public voting was to give the public a say as to which their favourite map was. It was the people's choice. In the future, maybe we'll include voting for categories for the public.

I wanted to keep the scale of these first awards fairly small and scale them up in future years if need be. I'm already on this track, and if it looks like the bulk of people want more categories, then we can do just that. I am very cautious about the scope of the awards becoming too large, so even if this is what people want, it might not be a quick or immediate change. 
anyways, thanks for the feedback @Johnny Law, @Esrael, @Mugwump, @Skacky and @otp

keep the feedback coming in guys :) 
ok sorry it was just the drool you put in his mouth as a constructive form of criticism. 
@Mugwump that was already the case given it was dead obvious which map was going to win. I'm not salty over Sepulcher winning it because it is a great map (though not my favorite by any stretch), but the way that award was conducted just did not work at all. 
Somethings To Consider 
What if the community nominated each category and judges picked winners from that pool?

Other than this notion I'd agree with every things Johnny brought up in #117. Especially this: I'd remove the technical requirements and encourage more descriptive categories:

Best Vanilla style map
Best Experimental map
Best Use of Secrets
Best Use of Combat

This kind of stuff. I came around to the Awards and for a dry run this turned out well.

I'd be happy to help with social media outreach next year or writing. When I take my time, I can write... uhhh .... good. 
Yeah it's hard to predict what will be going in a year from now, but it's likely that you could rope me into taking screenshots or doing write-ups.

P.S. a potential new category that occurred to me: best collection or episode. E.g. it would have been cool to recognize that retrojam 6 or jam 9 was amazing as a whole package. 
Just consider only whole releases instead of single maps, like the Cacowards. 
That would exclude some great maps like Sock's Grendel's Blade... 
Grendel's Blade is a full release, consisting of 1 map. 
"Whole releases" as in map packs/episodes/jams would be given awards as a whole. That doesn't exclude single map releases, since in that case the "whole release" is a single map.

I think that would have to be introduced as at least one additional category if all the categories weren't just changed. This year for example we saw the Best Gameplay award go to a jam map. If this category still exists in the next Quake Awards, and jam maps are to be considered, it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to give the award to an entire jam containing maps by different authors which potentially greatly vary in terms of merits.

I think a best episode/map pack award would be cool.

I also agree with renaming Vanilla Map to Vanilla Feel (or id-style), and that splitting Best Gameplay into Best Combat and something like Best Exploration/secrets. 
Heya guys,

Just FYI, I've brought on board Dumptruck and Ionous to help with the administration of the awards.

We've looked at the suggestions and comments and have made some changes, some of which will be announced soon.

We look to hold the awards in March this year, then probably in January each year thereafter. By that time we should have the system and process much more refined.

I'm looking foward to this years awards, they should be good :)


Get OTP On Board Too, He Seems Keen. 
So both events (yours and OTP's) are called "accolades" now? I thought OTP was asked not to use the word "award" to avoid confusion... 
I Think That‘s Shambler Trolling... 
One of them can be "honors" 
Preferably not the one that relies on having an A in the name... 
yeah, that was shambs being shambs 
It Was An Accident! 
Update :) 
Guys, I need to apologise for dragging my feet on this one. I've done a bunch of work on the back-end of the site, have collated the list of maps to get judged and have engaged with most of the judges who will be shortlisting the maps.

Yesterday I posted an update to the site with the changes for this years awards, these have been primarily due to the feedback from last years awards, so thank you to everybody who gave feedback.

Over the next week or two I'll be briefing the judges and ramping up the social media before announcing the public vote.

Thanks everybody for your patience.

pentagram of perfection is a pretty great name. 
Nice One Snaut. 
Maybe let somebody more motivated do the awards if getting them in a timely manner is out of the option. 
There are plenty of people working on this right now and have been for some time. There are many more categories and maps this year. So that's great new for the entire community. 
To anybody concerned.

While I could list the reasons why we're running behind this year, ultimately the buck stops with me. I realise that not being on a tight schedule only hurts the community, I did want to be further ahead than we currently are... but we aren't... and it sucks. If this troubles you, I apologise.

With regards to me stepping aside, I have every intention of doing so once the awards have a good formula that works for our community and are stable. We're still experimenting with the formula, and like last year I'll post a debrief thread on func so I can gauge people's opinions.

This years awards have taken on board some of the criticisms from last years debrief thread, and you should see some differences in the final product.

OTP, you're clearly passionate about the awards, if you're keen on helping out, shoot me a message and I can assign you some work that could help us out.

1 post not shown on this page because it was spam
You must be logged in to post in this thread.
Website copyright © 2002-2020 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.