Most I could say to Kew has already been said in Prophet's and Jet's posts. You seem to misunderstand the nature of this site. It is no longer 1998; Unreal's community is no longer as active as it once was. Considering that, you should regard the amount of replies and hits, and attention paid to your Illhaven thread as very high, because it really is! Wildly throwing around accusations of elitism and condescending writing is also pretty rich considering the way you behave at the moment. The reactions to your work are already highly positive and way more than most current-day Unreal mappers could ask for, so you really should re-consider whether it is wise to be upset over some feedback and minor criticism in light of the great praise you are receiving.
Also, UnrealSP's reviews generally work with very high standards due to the existence of modern, technically advanced projects such as Operation Na Pali, 7 Bullets etc. which obviously make older Unreal-era works look pale in comparison, believe it or not. Don't forget that this isn't IGN; UnrealSP.Org makes use of the full score palette rather than purely handing out scores from 7 to 10.
This is also the reason I strongly disagree with Delacroix' review scores (which, by the way, have been updated with his newly proposed Technical Execution values... which don't change anything at all, really, chipping off 2-3 points per map pack at best). For instance, Rajal Castle has been previously reviewed as "One of the best releases from the first year of Unreal custom mapping"... and received 25%. This seems adequate in comparison to modern UT99 packs, while scores as high as 50% for packs created around Unreal's birth date really do not.
Delacroix, I would, once more, like to kindly ask you to compare your scores to those of other map packs on the page (preferably reviewed under Hellscrag's administration) and to re-evaluate them.
