An unexpected coup recently was the revival, much like Valley of Alshar a few years ago, of a 'forgotten' map pack - Vigil99 by Holger Huck of DeCyber, which for years was only available in a v220 version incompatible with modern versions of Unreal. An Unreal v225f version has now been released by Casey of Klan KAOS, and is now available for download from Casey's original forum thread.
To give this newly rediscovered map pack further exposure, guest writer Shivaxi has now reviewed the pack for UnrealSP.Org. You can find Shivaxi's review here.

Any mirrors would be welcome.

Shivaxi and I disagreed slightly about the score, based on the pics and what was written in the review, but as I haven't actually played the pack myself I couldn't comment any further. I'd be interested to know what you guys think.

Thanks for the review, Shivi!

However I think the score is a little on the high side, altho I enjoyed the pack.

I THOUGHT (but I can be wrong) that I couldn't use cheats at the very start, but after a quicksave and reload I could.... but again, I may've been wrong. There are 2 crystal pyramids (first part of the game) and I could only open one ... dunno about the other....
When you start you CAN get killed quickly.... if you adapt to the level quickly there is more chance of survival.

Then the story. Start was nice.. but the ending was confusing. What/who is Domino?? It's not mentioned before, so I was kinda lost there..

I believe Domino...the Warlord you were fighting at the end...was the woman's soul you were trying to save.

I do agree the story is a bit confusing...that's why it got a 4 But it was carried out exactly as it says...which is you're fighting to save her soul.

Just had a quick go of this and it seems kinda cool. Although I don't really like any maps where the mapper is busy splashing his name all over the place.

The bit where you see inside the coffin at the start is cool... the first time... but after dying immediatly when running away from the first enemy (after finding I had limited bullets and no DP), then starting again, having to watch the intro again, only to be squished by some giant trap that comes out of nowhere, then again being killed by jumping off a teleporter all within the space of 20 seconds of the gameplay starting I gave up.

I'll try it again tomorow when I'm more awake, but I don't enjoy maps that have no learning curve...

Oh god.

When it will be converted to UT (if ever happens), I'll try it.

lol...the giant trap doesn't come out of no where...there's a button on the floor for each trap to trigger it...you probably ran into that and didn't notice and kept running right into the trap xD

Sorta over-enthusiastic scoring. Vigil99 gets points for custom scripting and gameplay elements, but it is ridden with bugs that prevent proper progress about half the time (getting stuck in the zombie corridor, then in the Krall temple thingamajig shortly thereafter etc). And a remake of a Quake mod is hardly worth originality points. It's nice, but it's no 73%.

I played Vigil on all difficulty levels and have to admit, I will play this again later, not that it is an outstanding map, but it's a completely different experience with some very surprising situations.

The final score of 73% doesn't make me raise my eybrows but there are a couple of sub-scores which I don't agree with.

Technical Execution 9
A 9 is too high IMHO. There are 2 problems which are major when they occur. One has been mentioned - getting stuck with the zombies (even after killing all of them). But the most problematic one is that sometimes the FlakCannon freezes when laying some mines.
I would give an 8 maximum.

Conceptual Grandness 9
With Conceptual Grandness I expect something Grand e.g: TLF, some sections of Xenome: First Day, the bridge section in 7B, basically something big in which the view and the whole setup (pathways) are awesome, astounding, baffling (in a good way). Vigil doesn't have that (personal opinion of course).
I'ld say an 8 is also the maximum possible for a map this size.

Gameplay Awe 9
Again an 8 is the maximum I would give. Mind you I think the battles are well staged and the new weapons and enemies are used perfectly but Vigil is probably not the kind of map one can beat without some extensive learning, expecially the Krall Kings, IceLords and OverLords are overpowering when you meet them the first time and a small mistake is instantly punished.
The only time I can really see the Gameplay Awe is in the beginning when you have no choice but to use the trap.

Gameplay Balance 7
On the other hand, taling into consideration my remark about Gameplay Awe, I think the balance deserves better than the 7 because once you get to know the enemies and the weapons - there is certainly a perfect difficulty level for every player (expect for the Über-player).
So I would raise that score to an 8.

Story Construction 4 and Story Implementation 6
Strange, I found the construction better than the implementation - especially the ending wasn't very clear (as pointed out). But the difference in opinion is probably because of what I perceive to be construction and implementation (I would switch the scores so the end result would be the same anyway).


On the whole I found Vigil certainly a keeper which deserves a score around 70%.

And maybe now you guys understand that reviews shouldn't be done by one person. It should be a group of people, probably the staff of USP...experienced mappers/reviewers. The opinion of one person is just to variable to accurately rate a map pack. I hope Hellscrag and the others consider this.

And just personally speaking...I think One Day was rated WAY to high...it's no where near as good as Vigil99 imo...

I disagree. Out of context, reviews may be arbitrary, but with access to a spreadsheet of all of the schema scores we've ever given - which I sent you - it should be quite easy to be relatively consistent. You just look at the other scores, and decide whether the pack you're reviewing is better than / worse than the others listed in that area of the schema. It's never an exact science, but it's a decent system.

"And maybe now you guys understand..." is a little patronising. It's not like we haven't thought of some of these issues over the past 9 years since UnrealSP.Org started...

Lol...well I would of hoped...it was never discussed though.

And yes...I did look at the other map packs...and asked myself how much I enjoyed them...the ones I played at least...compared to Vigil99.

I think Shivaxi's choice of wording was unfortunate. The way I understand it, it was meant to emphasise that opinions about certain aspects can vary (which you acknowlegde), and (this is my extrapolation of Shivaxi's reaction) that he sees some justification in my remarks, just as I see justification in other remarks made by other players with other maps.

The major problem with single reviews is that it is almost impossible to compare gameplay of the current map under review, with the gameplay of a map which was played a year or longer ago.

The example which comes to mind is ONP whch I have finished a couple of days ago - there are weak gameplay situations in there, but ONP is 30+ maps (38 IIRC) and looking at it as a complete pack - I think it's still good, even though it's aged). Now gameplay errors in a short pack or in a single map will leave a more lasting impression. Other aspects to take in mind are the preferences of players - I like lots of puzzles, and cautious progress - UB probably likes rougher fights, I liked the 3 Skaarj Hill because it looks so daunting, but leave your allies out of sight of the Skaarj and stay out of sight yourself, and your allies stand a better chance of taking on a single Skaarj and you are left with only one Skaarj to deal with. Some may say this is gameplay design fault - I say this opens up new tactical possibilities. The question of which is better is pointless - what is important is whether the majority of players find an enjoyable way to hadle the situation.
With this in mind I think Gameplay Awe and Conceptual Grandness are probably the aspects most prone to great differences in individual opinion.

Looking back at ONP, last week the Conceptual Grandness didn't hit me (I still recognised it) at it did when I first played it. By now, in 2010, I've played almost every pack and map there is and I've seen every new Conceptual Grandness thing so it's natural that older maps will suffer a lower score because of age itself.

Concerning Gameplay Balance I can (in my own way) judge ONP, and Xenome, and Vigil - why? because I've played on all (or almost) all difficulty levels. A single reviewer probably doesn't want (or have the time) to play all difficulty settings so I guess the review probably describes Medium difficulty, which may just not have been the adequate difficulty setting for the reviewer. I have played those maps on difficulty settings way too easy for me, but also too difficult for me so I know if there is a (and which) setting really gave me maximum pleasure.

Anyway, Shivaxi's review wasn't being scrutinised by me, all I did was state some areas where I differ in opinion (as I do with other reviews) and it seemed to me that Shivaxi, without turning his back on his own review, can see why his review of some aspects is bound to differ from other's reviews.

I am not really in favour of one review by a group of testers, but I would applaud many individual reviews on the gameplay aspects.

I didn't mean to put it like that. It's just that I don't think the current system works is all. I was hoping to change it...but it doesn't seem like that is going to happen...

I don't think there's anything wrong with the current system; it's just not as comprehensive as having more than 1 person review something.

We really should just get more people to post second opinions from time to time!