Post by BlackDaemon82 on Jul 2, 2023 16:12:47 GMT
Jun 9, 2023 13:06:44 GMT prototypetom said:
week 9 1) Gp De Silverstone by johan306
Nice F1 style track.
(2,1,3,2,3, 3,2,1,3,3) 23/30
1 route: very flat and little to identify sections.
2 checkpoints: not bad, but there are a number of unnecessary CPs on straights.
4 containment: slowdowns as apex props isn't good.
7 visual design: the building at the grid is really cool, but the rest of the track is very plain
8 prop-care: it's not the most ambitious build, so it really stands out how many snaplines there are.
2) GRIDS Motor Ring by B_RAD12Hunnit
Really nice twisty track with plenty of detail in the lines.
(3,1,3,3,3, 3,2,2,3,3) 26/30
2 checkpoints: a handful of unneeded CPs on the first half of the lap.
7 visuals: it definitely has a strong and consistent look, which is cool, but doesn't quite match the prettiest tracks
8 prop-care: the track lines get a bit sketchy in some transitions and there's a bit of prop bleed into the track at one point
3) Vortex's iKart Racing by jcbvortex
Incredibly pretty go kart track, and great fun to drive
(3,2,3,2,3, 2,3,3,3,3) 27/30
2 checkpoints: I thought this was going to nail it with one slightly questionable placement - but weird double checkpoint towards the end.
4 containment: just one very nasty high risk gap right on a building encroaching on the track.
6 snags: a little bit of steel here and there, and some of these wall props like a bit of go-kart skirt.
4) P-GP: Dreamweaver by prototypetom
(3,3,2,2,3, 2,3,3,3,3) 27/30
3 smooth: on the edge, but I think the blue bit towards the end of the lap clunks a bit.
4 containment: there's an apex you can drop off
6 snags: steel barriers
5) Champ!Stay Gold by Munagekouji
Brilliant looooong track that takes in a lot of East LS
(3,1,2,1,0, 3,2,3,3,3) 21/30
2 checkpoints: a few unnecessary ones or not best placed.
3 smooth: a bit of clunk in a couple of the transitions.
4 containment: some bits where what is inside and outside the track isn't clear and tree that seems very much inside.
5 lampposts
7 visuals: some of the later sections seem brilliant. But theres other places where props seem out of place or without high consideration.
6) Neo's Zancudo River Road2 by neo (Neo-323f)
great looking track, very well made and despite some challenging dangers, a lot of fun to drive.
(3,3,3,0,3, 3,3,3,3,2) 26/30
containment: Really the only issues in this track fall under this - but it's whole set - high risk falls, missing guiding/apex props and landscape and object encroaching into the track. see misc
misc: the range of containment issues around the track + I was giving benefit of the doubt on snags, which made my mind up on this misc point.
7) Black's Cassidy Creek GP by BlackDaemon82
Really fun and dramatic drive in the canyon
(3,2,3,0,3, 3,3,3,3,2) 25/30
checkpoints: this might be a route point instead, but the chicane after the flat turn end - the CP's point through a wall where you see the CP before the turn itself.
containment: just loads of encroachment into the track.
misc: combination of potential route point dropped for clarity (the track mysteriously shifting to the left coming out of the curvy end for example); there's a snaggy raised track-turn in a very rubby position under one of the bridges + a little bit of negligible steel; there's also enough encroachment I was questioning -3 covering it properly.
scoring explained in spoiler
{Spoiler}Basic scoring:
If a criteria description is fully satisfied, a race keeps 3 points.
If a criterion has modestly noticeable/risky technical errors, or is good but somewhat unremarkable, it loses 1 point.
If a criterion is obviously lacking in some way, or has clearly impactful errors/risks, it loses 2 points.
If a criterion is largely failed or ignored, it loses 3 points.
Criteria
1. Route. A creative, clear and engaging flow. Good transitions; challenging but fun to drive; no blind surprises or awkward bottlenecks compromising rather than challanging drivers.
2. Checkpoints. Clear and efficient use of checkpoints - All communicative, no surplus and not missing any in important places.
(rough reduction guide for surplus/missing/problem checkpoints: 1/2 = -1pt, 3/4/5 = -2pt, 5+ = -3pt)
3. Smooth. Smooth prop transitions and well-managed (problematic) undulations in streets/roads, if required.
4. Containment. Appropriate apexes; walls are in place on racing lines when needed to mitigate higher risks (falls etc) or obsticals. No high risk solid objects within the track lines/close to racing line.
5. Removables. ALL lampposts or similar obstructions removed/covered from inside track or within falling distance of track. Creator added destructable objects don't impact race negativly.
(rough reduction guide for removables (usually lampposts): one or two minor risks = -1pt, multiple minor risks = -2pt, high risk or many minor risks = -3pt)
6. Snag risks. Appropriate low-snag props are used in all key places. World objects with bad hitboxes covered/protected.
7. Visual design. Great all-track races have a distinctive visual architecture or quality to them - a theme, a memorable landmark/section/style or simply great looking. Street tracks have interesting connections and dressing that make roads feel fresh and looking great. Prop tracks have great consistancy or distinct look to them.
8. Prop-care. All the propping has been applied with a high level of care and detail - no-snaplines, track lines/rumble strips line up well, no odd gaps or joins.
9. Prop-visual. Unsightly building work under and around racing surfaces is well covered, and tracks look like they have been built with some consideration of IRL physics - no unsupported strips of thin track magically floating without structure.
10. General. Extra points* that might be deducted for:
a) Unusually egregious problems with any previous criteria
b) Any unusual problems/shortcomings not covered by other criteria.
c) Simplistic or flat creations.
d) Creations technically sidesteping criteria.
(*not limited to -3 points)
Final note: The criteria are designed to be as technical and objective as reasonably possible. We score subtractively, so we can point directly to observable/comparable shortcomings. What we're trying to do is put the technically robust races through to the semi-finals - not the ones we "like" best. FWIW, in principle I personally support creators sometimes compromising a bit on technical aspects if necessary for good creative reasons (I do!) - but this is a technical round.
If a criteria description is fully satisfied, a race keeps 3 points.
If a criterion has modestly noticeable/risky technical errors, or is good but somewhat unremarkable, it loses 1 point.
If a criterion is obviously lacking in some way, or has clearly impactful errors/risks, it loses 2 points.
If a criterion is largely failed or ignored, it loses 3 points.
Criteria
1. Route. A creative, clear and engaging flow. Good transitions; challenging but fun to drive; no blind surprises or awkward bottlenecks compromising rather than challanging drivers.
2. Checkpoints. Clear and efficient use of checkpoints - All communicative, no surplus and not missing any in important places.
(rough reduction guide for surplus/missing/problem checkpoints: 1/2 = -1pt, 3/4/5 = -2pt, 5+ = -3pt)
3. Smooth. Smooth prop transitions and well-managed (problematic) undulations in streets/roads, if required.
4. Containment. Appropriate apexes; walls are in place on racing lines when needed to mitigate higher risks (falls etc) or obsticals. No high risk solid objects within the track lines/close to racing line.
5. Removables. ALL lampposts or similar obstructions removed/covered from inside track or within falling distance of track. Creator added destructable objects don't impact race negativly.
(rough reduction guide for removables (usually lampposts): one or two minor risks = -1pt, multiple minor risks = -2pt, high risk or many minor risks = -3pt)
6. Snag risks. Appropriate low-snag props are used in all key places. World objects with bad hitboxes covered/protected.
7. Visual design. Great all-track races have a distinctive visual architecture or quality to them - a theme, a memorable landmark/section/style or simply great looking. Street tracks have interesting connections and dressing that make roads feel fresh and looking great. Prop tracks have great consistancy or distinct look to them.
8. Prop-care. All the propping has been applied with a high level of care and detail - no-snaplines, track lines/rumble strips line up well, no odd gaps or joins.
9. Prop-visual. Unsightly building work under and around racing surfaces is well covered, and tracks look like they have been built with some consideration of IRL physics - no unsupported strips of thin track magically floating without structure.
10. General. Extra points* that might be deducted for:
a) Unusually egregious problems with any previous criteria
b) Any unusual problems/shortcomings not covered by other criteria.
c) Simplistic or flat creations.
d) Creations technically sidesteping criteria.
(*not limited to -3 points)
Final note: The criteria are designed to be as technical and objective as reasonably possible. We score subtractively, so we can point directly to observable/comparable shortcomings. What we're trying to do is put the technically robust races through to the semi-finals - not the ones we "like" best. FWIW, in principle I personally support creators sometimes compromising a bit on technical aspects if necessary for good creative reasons (I do!) - but this is a technical round.
Links