the OLDC has been really crappy for almost a year now.
"Almost a year" is an exaggeration. July/August 2011 gave us one of the highest contest averages ever. September/October 2011 and January/February 2012 gave us several maps that scored above 8. Sure, all these contests had a lot of garbage, but that has always been the case. The problem isn't that the OLDC has been crappy, the problem is that its non-crappiness relies on a few very talented mappers. If they sit out (which happened this time), that's when the contest starts to become crappy.
How much this matters is whether or not 2.1 is coming soon.
Wouldn't it be hilarious if the OLDC were suspended after May/June and then 2.1 was released in August?
I am honestly puzzled how this will increase the amount of good levels we will receive for the OLDC, suspending it till after 2.1's release seem iffy to me. It could turn out like the first 2.0 OLDC, and we know how that turned out.
20 entries and an average very close to 5? Seems fine to me. The problem with that contest was that nobody knew yet how the multiplayer gametypes worked. We don't have that problem with 2.1. The closest thing would be lots of really crappy and buggy Lua scripts. And even if that happens, I think we would be able to tolerate one contest full of crappy test maps if it creates some momentum for future contests. After all, Nov/Dec '09 had 34 entries.
Also, I honestly enjoy making maps in 2 hours, mostly because I enjoy speed mapping.
You might enjoy making them, but we don't enjoy playing them. Past attempts have shown that seasoned mappers can make decent maps in two hours, but really good maps are more or less impossible. We don't need more decent but generic rush jobs from people who can do much better.
The reason the contest has failed is because all parties involved have stopped showing ANY interest in it, so why in the world would a newcomer want to be a part of it?
Because they want to make maps and the contest is a way of releasing those maps? The OLDC isn't designed as an incentive to make maps, it's an opportunity for those who are making maps anyway to get feedback on their work. Most newcomers try their hand at mapping at some point, but we rarely ever get to see any finished products, in the contest or otherwise. The problem isn't that people are ignoring the contest, the problem is that we have too few active mappers.
You want a better contest? Make people want to contribute. [...] Make us really wish we were the best mapmaker here!
That might encourage people to make maps for the sole purpose of entering the contest. Rarely do good things come from this. The incentive to make maps shouldn't be some external reward, it should come from the people themselves.
Do something interesting with the reward, like give that person unique insight into development!
I see two problems with this: The devs (people like Blade, KOTE and Spherallic) might stop entering the contest because they don't get any reward. Most of the best maps in the OLDC come from these people. Also, what happens when 2.1 is released and there's no insight to give anymore?
Better yet, encourage users to participate by participating yourselves -- instead of making maps specifically for 2.1 (because lord knows we'll never be playing them anyways), release those levels into the OLDC for public evaluation. Who gives a crap if Castle Eggman (gasp) is in the contest before 2.1's release? You'll get much-needed feedback on the map, and inspire your peers to come forth and be creative themselves! I won't even begin on how much attention you'll draw towards the contest by pouring anything you've made for 2.1 into it.
I fail to see the logic behind that. If Castle Eggman were released to the contest, how would that encourage users to submit maps themselves? If anything, it would
discourage them because we all know that CEZ would get all the attention and the other entries would be comparatively ignored. It would also set a standard of quality that people will fear they can't live up to.
(because lord knows we'll never be playing them anyways)
Now that's just not true. I can only speak for myself, but I know that I played the official SP maps a lot more than any custom levels.
Who gives a crap if Castle Eggman (gasp) is in the contest before 2.1's release?
I do. I don't want to see the official maps in their unpolished state. I've seen a lot of people who aren't interested in 2.1 CEZ at all because they've seen 2.0 CEZ, which sucks. Seeing an in-progress version of a map ruins the anticipation you might have for the finished version.
The contest has also sucked for years now because everyone here has refused to do anything but the routine, the ordinary, or what's expected
I don't know what you except from the OLDC, but I'm happy if I get to play some good maps. I don't care if they're "routine" or "ordinary" or anything. If they're good, they're good. Dumbventure, for example, wasn't good because of any supposed "innovation", but because it had lots and lots of well-hidden secrets and a great custom boss. These are not new concepts.
Giving a theme sounds like a great idea. It should at least be tried before it gets the ax...
I think it's been tried before, albeit quite a few years ago. The results were disastrous. If you want to improve the quality and quantity, the last thing you should do is restrict what people can work with. Many people won't participate at all because they have no idea for the theme at hand and many of the less talented mappers will submit terrible maps because they focus so much on the theme that they forget to make the map enjoyable. Not that I have a problem with trying it out, but I honestly doubt that it would help.
Would it be possible for us as a community to develop a single player level pack as a collaborated project?
That's an intriguing idea. Even though projects like these are usually doomed to failure, it would nevertheless inspire some activity. Go make a thread and see what happens!
___________________________________________________________
Now here's what I propose to attempt and fix the contest: Make reviews mandatory. The OLDC is primarily a feedback mechanism that helps mappers improve, and I think at that it fails. The mappers who have been recently contributing to the OLDC aren't really getting any better, they're stagnating at the same level. Why is that? Maybe they're not reading the reviews or maybe the reviews aren't helpful. Probably both. So maybe it would help if we force the users to give reasons for their scores and at least make an honest attempt to be helpful. Of course, I'm not expecting huge multi-paragraph reviews and high-quality insights from everybody. That would be foolish. But a bit more than a score and five words would be nice.