Who is better

who is better: Stig or maple?

 

staple is the best

 

agreed

 

stig because of mario bros - my favorite track

 

traced

Maple

 

Who's better, da Vinci or Picasso?

Two different styles, depends on which one you like better. I like grey detail so I'd say maple.

 

yeah I'm not too fond of only black. They are both amazingly skilled track makers, although I'd have to go with maple myself

 

maple hasn't been making tracks long enough to be compared to someone who has been one of the top trackmakers for essentially all of free rider 2 history... but this is a dumb question anyways

 

^
When it comes down to skill level they're equally good for their respective styles. I believe the question had nothing to do with history or influence, to which Stig obviously wins

 

true. quality can stretch thin over time if you're not consistent. stig has done an OK job of keeping up over the years (disappearing for months at a time hurts but his stuff is still quality), while Maple hasn't faced the test of time so we don't know how he stands up. he's hella rad in the now though and shows no sign of slowing down, so I gotta give that to him.

 

The best map Stig has ever put out imo is WJP NTBF, which is unfinished and doesn't compare to the quality of some of Maple's tracks, so I'd have to go with Maple.

 

it really depends on how you define "better", which is why I think this question is stupid. stig does have a larger body of work (maple only has 3 good tracks), a more distinct and innovative style, and more high-profile collaborations (lolz666, graggen, ldprider)

 

I don't like this question or comparison of authors regarding "higher skill levels". This is far too subjective. I know I've stated some bold things before but I regret a few of them. There comes a point where it is impossible to be better than another author skill wise. Especially with all the factors that should be taken account but most of the time isn't. So "hear" me out and read this.

Old authors that are still amazing are impressive for the consistency of their track quality, consistency is so a hugely impressive feat. Newer authors are amazing for their rate of improvement, they don't have the benefit of time to establish their reputation and skill, so in doing is also an impressive feat. So here we have someone who can keep up and exceed with the new and we also have those whose rate of improvement establishes themselves with the old despite the amount of time they have had to improve in comparison to the old.

Styles of the author are also subjective, opinions behind their styles could be positive/negative.

Reputation, the "firsts" are often associated with the title of the greatest. This is bull, they are the greatest for their times. Some however have works which are so badasss they exceed their time in which case the title of being one of the greatest still stands for them. Reputation and familiarity should not be considered or your comparison is already biased. It is human nature to generally like people you are more familiar with/ accustomed to.

Now going back to what I mentioned earlier there comes a point where no one can truly, absolutely be better than the other. Assuming the authors can draw anything one person might have an aspect to their drawing/track the other doesn't have and vice versa.

Lastly older authors have more tracks which are great, this is very impressive however newer authors haven't had the time to make the amount of tracks to match the old so to match the old with the few tracks they do have is also very impressive. This is subjective also since it is up to you to decide what is better/ more impressive.

All this is too subjective and most people I doubt considered the alternate perspectives of each factor. Comparison at this point is based on what people value and different people value/ appreciate different things <main point, title should be changed to who you prefer not saying anyone's opinion here is wrong.

E; ok this was really unnecessary of me since I guess it is no big deal idk why I bothered writing all this

 

I think this poll is ludicrous...
edit... maybe not the 'mad' face.. haha

 

I agree with this completely. That's the pinnacle of stig's art. Maple is more skilled but his is the most similar to lolz's stuff that I've ever seen. stig wins the originality game.

 

*waits for lolz666 to respond to this thread*

 

Stig is a original motherlover so it is fair to call him that but I hope I didn't get judged on my originality because my stuff reminds you of lolz. I pretty much have a whole track with nothing that lolz has done along with a collab which is also in a completely different style if you think I copy... and I suppose my future tracks to come.

 

Maple Stig lolz666 should all collab

 

bruh that would be too glorious our mortal eyes could not shield its amazement and our brains shall melt by simply a glimpse at a single line bequeathed by the canvas.

 

This thread is hilarious, starting to remind me of oldish TM/early CR with all the "who's better" and copycat talk.

I hope lolz666 comes in and drops an applicable and funny gif.