First of all, thank you all very much, I'm so happy I made it to the third place

Funny that the MT becomes one of the most discussed things in many MTCs at the Moment
I wouldn't say, it is really important, since this is a TRACK contest, it is all about the track itself for me.
A fancy or impressive MT could give 1 or 2 extra Points, but I wouldn't give a track minus Points, because it has no complete Media Tracker.
And of course an GPS could be very helpful, espessially if you have not much skill as pfm alredy mentioned, but as it got said in one other MTC, if you can't drive the track, then the route and/or the sign-placing is bad.

This is my opinion, maybe some of you appreciate it and I hope it will help in the voting with MT

Nitrono says:

A fancy or impressive MT could give 1 or 2 extra Points, but I wouldn't give a track minus Points, because it has no complete Media Tracker.

Isn't that somethwat the same? Giving bonus points for MT or taking some off for missing MT.
i think pfm made the right point: You have to stand out of the other tracks. Even if its our track, look at the winner. It clearly stands out of all the others by using the RPG Title Pack, which made it possible for there to be a completly unique scenery.

@Skellborn: Okay, I wrote it a little bit different than I meant. I was more going to say, that if a track wasn't really good, a good MT could be some kind of a bonus. But if the track was truly fantastic but had no complete MT, it shouldn't get minus points. That's also a little bit unmotivating for the builder, I guess
Of course your track definately stands out of the other ones for it's different textures, objects and scenery, but I think this is also something different. Because route, scenery and such are something in the track itself, the MT is just something around the track imo. Of course pfm is right, that an intro is a nice way to sell your idea, but getting the track by playing itself, not with a skipable video-thing is the sence for me to drive and build a map.

Edit: I want to mention, that with a not "complete" MT I mean a not completed MT, something like missing an outro for example, since there are given many minus points for maps in different MTCs for something unimportant like that.

Skellborn says:
It clearly stands out of all the others by using the RPG Title Pack, which made it possible for there to be a completly unique scenery.

So a track can win because of scenery but MT shouldn't be worth anything? I think that's kind of ridiculous In my mind they are very similar. If anything, MT can be more useful because you can put a GPS^^ Scenery is used to give the map a certain feel, and I think MT can do that as well. So if you're going to give scenery such a high priority, MT should be worth something too

Well i've never said MT isn't important or shouldn't be counted into judging as well

I made that statement too undeline the importance of pfm's argument^^

Oh, sorry I misread your comment

Cool discussion guys. It's time to put in my own opinion.

Most of the times I skip intros. On a server I don't want to miss racing time/start late, so I just skip the intro. For me it has become such a habit that I hardly ever watch an intro. Only if someone tells me how great the intro is, I will watch it. Then I usually appreciate it, but in general I don't pay much attention.

MT during the race is different, because it affects the racing experience directly. Loop cameras and such are all necessary and I would give negative points for a lack of those depending on how fatal it is.
A GPS is only necessary on very difficult tracks. When I lack the time to get a fully clean run on that mega transitional hardcore stadium map, I appreciate if there is a GPS I can watch instead, although it is much more fun and rewarding to race the track myself.
On regular tracks I avoid watching the GPS, because on servers it costs too much time to invest one run into seeing how the route looks like. Instead the map should have a proper signage and a scenery that guides the correct way properly and there will be no issues in finding the path to the finish line. Sadly the GPS gets a bit overhand in many cases, such that the pathfinding without it is extremely difficult due to the lack of signs or bad sign placement, because "You can watch the GPS to find the route" - "Yeah, that is totally going to happen,thanks... Okay let's play a different track "

Outros: eeeh, I have a hard time remembering when it was that I watched an outro the last time. sorry


Overall the MT can enhance the feeling of a great track a bit, but it will never be able to do that on a bad track. If the track is bad and your MT is awesome, you're going to lose anyways. But the other way around is totally fine for me.
So I would never punish a track due to a lack of MT, but I definitely will for bad signage

Yeah, i agree with almost everything what all of you said =)

I meant exactly that i find a MT intro a bonus in the MTC context, online and in other contexts I mostly skip intros like haenry (unless I read in the awards beforehand that the intro is great, or if its a track by a reputed MT craftsman).

It was my first time judging, and I definitely did not remove points to every track with no Intro, i just mention it in the comments. I totally get that some people are not skilled at all in MT [well I know I'm not!].

About route finding / GPS I don't agree totally with what was said.
I think MTC tracks don't have to necessarily have good route finding like an online track has to. But if it doesn't, it should definitely have a GPS! I will dock points for that, because simply such a track will not interest me a lot among the others I'm reviewing.

I think in the end is not about if there is MT or not GPS or not, but about the whole track package and if it is fun and creative. I think the key to MTC for me is that... Fun and creative in whatever aspects it is (driving line, scenery, MT, etc)

=)

I agree with that it is like a bonus When I judged, I looked for theme, creativity, route, and scenery. But if someone had a nice mt, I added it to the scenery category. But I wouldn't take away points because of no MT unless it was a problem (like no loop cam when you really need it or something).

I'm a builder. I've always been facinated by what otehrs are able to do in the editor. what kind of idea's they have and how they execute stuff. the MT is a part of the Editor so this is also a part of building a map imo.
I personally always watch the intro on the first run. (I never skip one unless I'm getting dizzy from it)

MT is such a great feature in the track editor.
Intro: just a presentation of what you have made. also a note of who has build it and the trackname. (on tmu this was always shown online, etc. now only if you press the tab key)
ingame: enhancing the driving experience.
outro: showoff from the map.

a map wich has this all. is a map on wich the builder has put more effort in tho enhance the track. so why wouldn't we give these people a higher score for adding such stuff to a map?

if we would give everyone the same points for MT, than why should someone make an MT for example?

my points system for mt is something like this:
intro: 1
ingame: 0.5 (for gps only), 1 (for gps and cam changes)
outro: 1
-------------- +
total: 3
additional points for standing out: 1
end total: 4

than I sum this with the scenery category.this way I do not deduct points but I just judge on what is ibncluded on the map and what not.