Saying that they fail and calling coldsnap dicksnap are heavily opinionated.

And I don't think it is fair to judge a map based on ships and textures.

Now...I really am sick of people calling hugeass, coldsnap, and Extinction failures. they are just maps that are different than most maps you seem to consider 'good'

These three maps are highly enjoyable and fun to play on. A map does not suck because you think so. think of it this way; If you hate chocolate, does that make chocolate a bad thing? no, of course not.

There seems to be a lack of discussion here and more a collection of hate messages about large maps. (In this thread.)

Quote Originally Posted by legionaire45 View Post
Extinction is a fail map.

Modifying shitty maps is a guaranteed way to be associated with AIDS and fail.

Extra large maps in general suck cock.

Make something that isn't dicksnap with a texture swap and some shitty ripped ship models and we'll give you crit other than "do something else".

When you want to make a map, think to yourself: "Will my map even be played 3 months down the road?"
"Is there anything even remotely memorable about my map?"
"Is my map just a remake of someone elses map that has been played to death?"

Look at CMT Snow Grove. It was fairly different from dicksnap (excluding the setting), had decent gameplay and had shiny things that many other modders/mod teams don't bother adding like different weapon loadouts, different weapons in general, etc.

Actually, don't. Snow Grove is also an overplayed piece of shit. Make something else that will eventually become an overplayed piece of shit.

Oh, and don't bother with Halo CE. Source/UT3/CryEngine2 are far better and have a bigger target audience. Lots of people here play TF2 and CS:S, so asking them for gameplay advice shouldn't be much of an issue.