Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Come and join our gamer community by
registering for free here
Other Gaming Forum
PC games
Warcraft Tools and Tutorials
Random RPG Bitz
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Skyseek" data-source="post: 124849" data-attributes="member: 6753"><p>Thanks for posting the tutorial.</p><p></p><p>It's a little weird though...</p><p></p><p>You see, you have posted a rather "newbish" tutorial.</p><p></p><p>You've taken the liberty writing the tutorial to explain some extremely basic concepts of mapmaking that are fairly commonly known. Well, basic tutorials are useful to new (or newbie) mapmakers, so the idea behind such a tutorial is perfectly sound.</p><p></p><p>With that said, the tutorial you have written would only be of use to a newbie because only a newbie would be extremely lacking in mapmaking knowledge. So I take it that you're assuming your reader knows next to nothing about mapmaking, which is good because there are such readers. However, considering that you're not giving an in depth explanation for the steps and methods in the tutorial, you're assuming that your reader understands what to do without an explanation.</p><p></p><p>This means there are two underlying assumptions: <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The reader doesn't know the basics of mapmaking (otherwise there's nothing to learn).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The reader is familiar with the basics of mapmaking (otherwise there's no way to understand what you're saying).</li> </ol><p>That's rather oxymoronic.</p><p></p><p>If you want to write a tutorial, it's okay to write it with one of the two assumptions in mind, but you're making both assumptions and have consequently left us with a completely worthless tutorial, since the only people who will understand what you're saying already know what you're saying. GJ mate.</p><p></p><p>Now, the only way you can accomplish something like that is either on purpose or by not writing the tutorial with the reader in mind. (Hint: If you write a tutorial, it's crucial to have the reader in mind.) If you're not writing the tutorial with the reader in mind, then it's safe to assume you were writing it with yourself in mind, so probably the only thing you meant to do by posting this is look good. On the other hand, you just wrote a shit tutorial, which doesn't help you look good. Once again, that's rather (oxy)moronic on your behalf.</p><p></p><p>I guess I should give you a little credit though, there are people out there who don't know about spellbook while they do know how to use the world editor.</p><p></p><p>And this, ladies and gentleman, is how you write a tour de force critique of a poor quality tutorial.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Skyseek, post: 124849, member: 6753"] Thanks for posting the tutorial. It's a little weird though... You see, you have posted a rather "newbish" tutorial. You've taken the liberty writing the tutorial to explain some extremely basic concepts of mapmaking that are fairly commonly known. Well, basic tutorials are useful to new (or newbie) mapmakers, so the idea behind such a tutorial is perfectly sound. With that said, the tutorial you have written would only be of use to a newbie because only a newbie would be extremely lacking in mapmaking knowledge. So I take it that you're assuming your reader knows next to nothing about mapmaking, which is good because there are such readers. However, considering that you're not giving an in depth explanation for the steps and methods in the tutorial, you're assuming that your reader understands what to do without an explanation. This means there are two underlying assumptions:[list=1][*]The reader doesn't know the basics of mapmaking (otherwise there's nothing to learn). [*]The reader is familiar with the basics of mapmaking (otherwise there's no way to understand what you're saying). [/list]That's rather oxymoronic. If you want to write a tutorial, it's okay to write it with one of the two assumptions in mind, but you're making both assumptions and have consequently left us with a completely worthless tutorial, since the only people who will understand what you're saying already know what you're saying. GJ mate. Now, the only way you can accomplish something like that is either on purpose or by not writing the tutorial with the reader in mind. (Hint: If you write a tutorial, it's crucial to have the reader in mind.) If you're not writing the tutorial with the reader in mind, then it's safe to assume you were writing it with yourself in mind, so probably the only thing you meant to do by posting this is look good. On the other hand, you just wrote a shit tutorial, which doesn't help you look good. Once again, that's rather (oxy)moronic on your behalf. I guess I should give you a little credit though, there are people out there who don't know about spellbook while they do know how to use the world editor. And this, ladies and gentleman, is how you write a tour de force critique of a poor quality tutorial. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Other Gaming Forum
PC games
Warcraft Tools and Tutorials
Random RPG Bitz
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top