TIP 1: Please don't over exaggerate or repeat what everyone else writes.
TIP 2: Please keep it within Portal/Portal 2 theme.
And the most important part:
I want to be submerged in the map. This is the hardest thing of all. The puzzles should be the right difficulty, the aesthetics have to be very good. Theme should be good. Possibly good use of (custom) voices. And when you play maps like that it's like: "Let's play this map". After you finished it you have the feeling "those were 5 well spent minutes", you look at your clock and realize you've just spent 45 minutes in this room. Those are my favorite maps. That is the kind of map that receives a 5/5 from me.
All I want is a creative puzzle with unique or unexpected puzzle elements, with an emphasis on logical solutions rather than twitch timing. Having to defensively set up portals in previous chambers and plan ahead to prevent yourself from dying or getting stuck in some stupid way is always a plus.
I want a map that adheres to a specific style. There is a lot of content in Portal 2, and mishmashing everything together does not provide a high quality user experience. My favorite maps from the 2011 contest were the ones that picked a visual style and ran with it all the way to the finish line. If you're going to make a clean Wheatley map, stick with it. If you're going to make a 50's map, stick with it. Do not mix visual themes together, it never works.
I want a map with well designed and thought-out puzzles. Emphasis on the word "puzzles". This is a puzzle game, and puzzle gamers are going to be playing your map. It's great that you've learned that the Source engine is really powerful and you can make other "mini games" in it. Portal isn't the best delivery method for it. When I play Portal, I want to play puzzles, not a gimmick. There are tons of clever and interesting game mechanics already built into the game, you don't need to reinvent the wheel by making something new.
I want a map that is engaging without being overbearing. I want a map that is clever without being either artifically difficult or too hand-holdy. I want a map that skillfully uses all of the tools available to the mapper; texture, lighting, shadows, game mechanics, sound, all of it. I want a map that doesn't use gimmicks like screen text or a saturation of "heard it one too many times" GLaDOS voice clips. I want a map that doesn't think including a Companion Cube will make it an instant classic.
I want a map that doesn't make me regret downloading it. I want a map that flows. I want a map that is a pleasure to play.
Fair enough. I totally agree with each of the mentioned points. 
Only one thing though: even though I believe the mixture of styles will never ever work, there are people developing really awesome personal styles (I'm trying to get a personal theme too...) that won't necessarily fit to any of the available Portal2 themes, BUT (this is the important part) these personal aesthetics are solid, well-defined and homogeneuously used throughout all the chambers. There are many people that cannot accept this only because it is NOT a fixed Portal2 theme, and that's unfair. As you said, this is overall an artistic tool, every detailed and well-developed map should be well received by the communnity instead of being rejected for not describing perfectly one of already existing themes.
In my humble opinion...
josepezdj wrote:
@msleeper:Fair enough. I totally agree with each of the mentioned points.
In my humble opinion...
Oh no, don't get me wrong. I have no problem with people developing their own style, as long as like you said, they're consistent and thorough with it. I'm not saying that EVERY map needs to fall in one of the visual styles from Portal or Portal 2. If you're going to come up with your own visual style, don't half ass it. The Colors series of maps is a great example of coming up with something new and pulling it off really well (even if there wasn't much in terms of consistency between maps, beyond the "colors" theme).
But again, don't do it as a gimmick either. Don't decide "I'm going to come up with my own special look because that alone will make my map cool" because it won't. The visual theme needs to be justified. Again, don't half ass it if you're going to go the extra mile to come up with something totally new.
EDIT
I want to clarify, re: using a mini-game or a "gimmick" in your map and where I said you don't need to reinvent the wheel. Again I'm not saying that no map ever should come up with a new mechanic, or a new "type" of puzzle, or anything like that. What I mean is that you shouldn't feel like your map NEEDS to have a new mechanic to have it stand out. When these things are done poorly, they really stand out and make a bad map just that much worse. But when it's done well, it's seamless. And it doesn't have to be "in your face" totally crazy or complex, it can be a new approach to existing game mechanics we're all familiar with.
EDIT 2
I thought of a specific example of a really bad use of "new visual style" from a (now removed) 2011 contest map. Allow me to quote myself:
msleeper wrote:
You know the old 1971 Willy Wonka and The Chocolate Factory, how the first 30 or 45 minutes of the movie is totally normal and is a happy Disney musical. And then they get on Willy Wonka's boat and there is this insane acid trip nightmare boat ride that comes out of fucking left field for no reason, and afterwards is never resolved or discussed ever again for the rest of the movie?That's kind of how I feel about this section in your map.
Overall the map is tedious at best and completely broken at worst. We could not beat the last part of the puzzle in the first room, no matter how perfectly timed me and my partner both hit the final panels. I took one look at the second area and immediately skipped over it. Same with the third puzzle, I just simply did not have the patience to sit there and pray that I got lucky enough to get the spheres into the catchers.
The first room would be a pretty good puzzle in and of itself, if it worked properly. Unfortunately it doesn't.
... Just imagine it as a sp map when your playing it. Only the 4th map isn't puzzly. But I put in 4 different portal 2 styles in the 4 maps.
I really like it when people come up with there own style to a map. A recent map that I played that came up with a different style, even though it wasn't huge difference, was Impetuosity. That map had it's own unique feel to it.
msleeper wrote:
Oh no, don't get me wrong.
Hey, don't you worry, I didn't. I only took the chance to state what I wrote about the personal styles. I liked what you said above as a complement to your previous post. And that example you posted about that horrible personal style map on that picture was clear enough to understand even more what sucks and could be seen as "new".
I think that "new/personal style" is a concept much wide and not all of those personal styles will be good-looking only because they're new... Also, ofc focusing in developing a whole new style as a gimmick to boost the success of your map is worthless: I think this forum is compossed by clever and demanding people, not by naive lambs...
msleeper wrote:
I want a map with well designed and thought-out puzzles. Emphasis on the word "puzzles". This is a puzzle game, and puzzle gamers are going to be playing your map.
I've been playing to puzzle games all my life because it's my genre! (not only videogames, I've got a 60 puzzles collection made of wood and steel, with fascicles talking about history puzzle games and eminent people in this genre, etc etc.)... I love Portal. As in other threads have been discussed, there is an eternal controversy: puzzles VS aesthetics / hard maps VS other difficulty maps... Well, I like the balance, and I would like that people would consider both edges too. I'm working on a new look for my mappack altogether with funny + medium difficulty puzzles, and ofc I'm trying to detail all the maps the more I can in the (short) time I've got. Anyway I know that some people haven't got time enough for doing all it's in their mind (I'm one of them) and sometimes don't detail much their maps because otherwise the project could last like 3 years or so! (unless you are a kid that has been dropped out from school with plenty of time... ...there are some as well in this forum... ) and that is a totally respectable approach as well.
Rule #1: TEST IT! Over and over again!
Rule #2: If you aren't proud of your map, don't release it
Rule #3: Get some feedback (e.g. from friends) before you release it
Believe me, the players can see if you followed these rules.
josepezdj wrote:
difficulty
There's a lot to be said about the difference between making your map challenging without adding artificial difficulty. By that I mean, essentially, punishing the player for being imprecise or failing to do a certain task. The least amount of backtracking the better, since making the player do some long series of events over and over again is frustrating and not fun.
Portal gameplay is the art of the "aha! moment". The best puzzles are the ones where the player had to really analyze their surroundings and the elements at play, and not puzzles that rely on hair trigger reflexes.
As an aside, somewhat related note. Back in Portal 1, there was a lot of engine "tricks" using physics and how Portals worked. Depressingly, there arose a section of the community who built maps all around knowing tricks to the physics engine. And to an outsider who doesn't know or care about those things, and only knows that speedy thing goes in = speedy thing comes out, they were frustrating, impossible, and not fun.
As far as this community's collective brainpower, I definitely think there are multitudes of really creative people here. A lot of these long rants I write about "what makes a good map" are geared towards people who don't have a Spotlight map or a purple name - though everyone can do good to revisit the fundamentals of what makes good maps good.