PC gaming and mapping (split thread)

[wviperw]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of ... _in_the_US

The PC has in fact seen a decline in sales up to 2006. Some of this may be cyclical however. But the fact remains that consoles have seen a pretty big growth recently with industry trends leaning towards consoles.

With respect to games to map for, I'd say in addition to War§ow being a good bet, CPMA is probably the only active mod (both being played and developed) left for Q3.

[Jemcdv]

I downloaded Warsow and watched a video clip of the game, why does it look cell shaded/wierd?

The floater i tested?

Yeah that one, I'm surprised you remember that map. It looks cool in Q4 but I can't get gtK 1.5 to work on XP windows and the Q4editor is not flexible or fast enough for me to manipulate any complex geometry. (The 3d preview camera doesn't have convenient free flying with the mouse, grouped brushes are a pain, and it doesn't remember my grid colour themes.)

making games is just too involved these days--what used to take one guy to build now takes a dozen guys, all from different disciplines

it's never going back to the way it was, either

This makes sense. Isn't the video game industry turning into a billion dollar one?

---

Oh, I almost forgot. What happened to HL2? I thought that had a big following.

[Amphetamine]

I have to agree on the subject of PC gaming being in the decline. The trouble is, there's very little I want to buy PC wise at the moment. I can honestly count less than 10 titles that have been anounced for release in the next 12 months (Including steam releases) that I say I actually want to play.

I really do think that pc gaming is moving into another dark age.

Yes, I'm still mapping for Q3, I'm still squeezing out the last of what it has to offer mapping wise. I keep meaning to start mapping for somthing more advanced, but never quite get around to it.

[rgoer]

oh come on foo

I love pc gaming, and I want it to be the way it was about five years ago forever, but give me a break

mmos are a lock-in, and yeah you're right to mention nine million WoW subscribers, but otherwise I can't think of a single upcoming pc title that I'm actually looking forward to buying and playing

as far as the video games industry turning into a billion dollar one, the video games industry has been a multi-billion dollar industry since the start of the decade... and it went on to outpace the cinema box office by something like 3 billion in 2004 or 5

anyway enough thread derail, more screenshots

wviperw make a War§ow race map tia

[ix-ir]

The scene could be a golden age again.

All of you have plenty to learn and to teach about competitive mapping and there is a lot of room for the development of ideas in competitive mapping like combining looks with gameplay. The future of mapping is in collaboration, even for deathmatch-scale levels because no one person has the skills to produce a top-notch level any more. Adapt to that.

#promode or drop by our forum linked from http://www.promode.org if you have an interesting map you'd like to develop for competitive CPMA gameplay. We're developing a method for the production of decent gameplay maps.

Edit: if this comes across as a bit forthright I apologise, the scene is exactly the same among players - like some lost tribe of Israel wandering from bad game to bad game and wishing things were like they used to be. Well start mapping and playing Q3 again, things can be fresh and can be pushed further but you need to invest some effort, then the enjoyment will return.

[leilei]

hey map for my project too because ummmm its important yep yep join us and join the many. the many are strong.

[spookmineer]

The future of mapping is in collaboration, even for deathmatch-scale levels because no one person has the skills to produce a top-notch level any more. Adapt to that.

I don't agree.


That would not have been my first line, but I just read this post.


Just 1 day before Infernis' post, there was a thread called "Apparently Raven is doing the next Wolfenstein"
which I replied the following to (I think it's very related to this thread) (sorry for being off topic):

Like (many?) others I have my reservations, the last "supposed to be big hits" games were somewhat disappointing in the multiplayer aspect.
Most developers develop games for the single game market, multiplayer almost comes as an afterthought.

There are a few things to say about this:
With every new game, the communities get more thinned out. Some people stay with the game they know (when they find out gameplay is not that much different), others move on (attracted to the new eye candy or for other reasons). Where once there were (for example) 5 communities, there are now 25.

The market is drenched with solid fps games, the days of just a few good fps games is definately over. It is very hard to gain a large community in a game segment of which gameplay is so set in stone. And it is this community that will play a large role in the replayability of a game. A game just needs a lot of people to stay interesting. The modding and mapping scene will add playability to it as well.

The "big money" seems to be in single player games (not based on any real numbers, just my conclusion from reading a lot of interviews and the decisions being made by developers lately). The initial attention to MP leaves a lot to be desired by looking at the latest fps games. (examples: netcode issues, involvement of community in game development or lack thereof, demo making issues, lack of movie making tools - all these can make or break an MP game in a short time)

The interest of developers and gamers are clearly different, contradictary. Developers would like people to play the SP, and move on to the next game. People want to play a game, and if they like it, extend the experience for any length of period. In the end, the developers lose money if people do just this.

Developers are having a hard time making a new fps game interesting. The plot has deepened a bit over the years, but still (obviously) it boils down to "shoot, kill, and move on". Even some weapons are featured in almost every fps game. There are only so many things you can come up with and get away with.
They do have new technology on their side: newer, faster hardware combined with stronger game engines makes for more eye candy. This is the bait they will use to lure us in.
Funny thing which happens almost every single time: after admiring the scenery for about a week, people tweak down the settings in order to get the frames per second up, so they can finally just play the game.
The thing that lures us in is in most cases not enough to keep us in that game. Gameplay is. It is possible the best gameplay is already here, in some game, maybe already a few years old.
The game in particular might be different from person to person, but chances are it's already out there (especially if developers don't pay much attention to MP lately).
The only thing that hasn't really changed is gameplay. Every new fps game is a copy/mix of former games.

I realise most of what I wrote is about MP, but some parts apply to SP as well. What is the goal of the game? What are the gameplay rules, and which tools do you have to accomplish this goal? The more you play, the more they seem the same.


It would be a pity if most of us will regard the announcement of a new game with such negativity, but I find myself one of "most".

[obsidian]

Some games to look forward to:
http://digitalbattle.com/2006/08/01/top ... -pc-games/
http://www.firingsquad.com/features/mos ... /page4.asp

In particular, I'm looking forward to:
ET:QW
Crysis
Clive Barker's Jericho

[obsidian]

BTW, I decided to split this from the screenshots thread too keep everything on topic. FYI.

[spookmineer]

I'm looking forward to HL2 ep.2, mainly because of Portals.
New gameplay, puzzle fps.

ET: QW: this type of game I'm not used to (realistic gameplay), it looks nice but again it looks like a mix/copy of other games (I think I would buy it nonetheless, just for the technology involved).

Crysis: I've seen some movies and it does look awesome (even the editor does) but again, what additional gameplay does it offer?


This is ofcourse no personal attack (thanks for splitting the thread btw), just general questions. We've seen the replies to in-game footage of doom3, quake4 and other games (UT2007, or UT3 as it's now called, does look nice as well).

In the end, what binds people to a game? The community does (in the form of sheer player numbers, mappers and coders), and over the years these communities have been scattered.
I know I'm repeating myself, but gameplay plays a big part in binding gamers, but with every new game released, these communities will scatter more. Gameplay in fps will hardly change.

I'm at a loss why WoW has so many players (not fps, but still), on the other hand CS still has the most players online. There is no unified Theory of Games which game will pull through and which doesn't...
Maybe... if people get bored with the same game over and over, and a (very) good alternative is at hand, people will massively move to another game. Unlikely.

If not, I agree with Rgoer:

well I hate to be the sour grapes guy, but the kind of mod communities that quake 1/2/3 (and other titles of their eras) enjoyed will never, ever happen again

making games is just too involved these days--what used to take one guy to build now takes a dozen guys, all from different disciplines

it's never going back to the way it was, either

[obsidian]

If you've ever played Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, you'll get what QW:ET is like. I'd hardly call it 'realistic gameplay' though... seeing as how you zoom around running at speeds close to quake3 and fight with futuristic weapons against an alien race. It involves a lot more teamplay to be effective so maybe that's what you mean by realistic. And I don't think QW:ET is really a copy of other games... more like the sequel to W:ET. A lot of people are comparing it to the Battlefield series, but that's hardly the case.

I doubt if Crysis will offer anything new to gameplay, but it still looks like a good single player game. Hopefully. I didn't enjoy FarCry as much as other people and thought it was overrated.

I'm looking forward to Jericho, since I really enjoyed Clive Barker's Undying. Scary, great storyline and good gameplay.

[Lukin]

I'm with spookminer - the mapping is dead because the communities for each game are getting smaller and smaller.

I think that people still make maps, for this game or another, but they do it just for themseves. The overall number of mappers may decreased, yet still I get a lot of questions how to this, or that in the editor and then I never see the levels of this people on any forums. I guess they just don't see any sense in releasing their work in the net - no one will notice anyway (a gap between a proffesionall product and these completely amateur maps is another factor probably). Hell, if I would make a map for "Prey" or for a "Painkiller" I would also keep it for myself. Posting it here would be rather poitnless, and I doubt I would find a strong community for these games somewhere in the net.

Unfortunately it's the same thing with "Quake" series. I wouldn't blame only "Q4" for that - the whole deathmatch scene is dead, and was dead way before the game hit the shelves. I'm not sure what's the reason. Consoles, WOW, CS, game bugs, the skill needed to master the game, cheaters - probably something out of these.

P.S. Mapping for "D3" engine is not that hard as some people claims it is - the entire map still can be made in Radiant.

[dnky]

I see a number of reasons for the decline in mapping and modding. I have come to more or less the same conclusion as has already been posted: the community as it was for Quake, Quake 2 and Quake 3 will not continue to exist in the same way. I tend not to agree that a single mapper can no longer be expected to posses all the skills required to produce levels with current technologies. The tools and information on how to use them are available if one takes the time to look. I understand that game studios subdivide the work load between builders, concept artists, 2d art teams, lighting teams, scripters, coders etc. A mapper or builder does not have ownership of a level. One guy CAN do all this in the amateur field, but it obviously takes far more time than is available to a professional company, and in most cases to a lesser quality.

With a game like Quake 4 what I witnessed was a split between designers that were not pushing their skill base and those that have tried to extend their expertise. What resulted as the playing community remained small, was a handful of hardcore fans with their favourite maps, and most other designers becoming disenchanted with the effort of producing work that would receive little or no recognition. This doesn’t mean that Quake 4 is bad, it’s just that the nature of the game, the technology and hence the community had changed. Previously there was room for all.

From a designer point of view much of the longevity of Q3 (apart from its innate playability) derived from the people that continued to work on developing aspects of that engine’s capabilities. Ydnar is the most obvious (although not exclusive) example. Q3map2 vouchsafed so much more creative power to the designers that to this day many levels built using the old engine can still stand on their own with levels created on/with/for ‘next gen’ titles.

Quake 4 was a good game, but it was not the game many of us wanted. It was not Quake 3 with pretty graphics. The technology for me is good. I eagerly await QW:ET to see just where SD have taken the D3 engine. The question that inf asked still remains though. Where now for mappers? I want to work with the new technology, I want to improve and develop a range of skills. But for what game? Should we switch to Source or Unreal? Where should the amateur designer put his/her energies? If the future of gaming is on consoles rather than PCs how is this likely to affect mappers and modders? The bottom line for me at the moment of writing is: are we all just wasting our time? Is the creative side of the gaming community really going to slide into oblivion? Are the future gaming studio employees going to be found only as college graduates and no longer the enthusiastic amateurs?

@Dnky: use paragraphs please... thanks.

[d3mol!t!on]

I think with first person shooters especially, developers are just running out of ideas. So many interesting story lines have already been done, and loads of different game play types have already been done, so in the end we just get the same old stuff. The only thing that seems to change majorly are the visuals, and with better visuals usually come more complex level design. Crysis does look a real step into ground breaking visuals, but I expect the level design will be pretty damn difficult, especially considering how open and large areas look to be from game media so far. I for one just don't have the spare time to make maps when it might start to take me six months to create something really polished, especially now (as spookmineer pointed out) that communities are so scattered, which in general probably means you're not going to get great reception on your finished product by the time you finish it anyway.
There is also a continuing need to have an expensive system to play these ever visually advancing games. And even more so to make levels for them, especially now that some editors are starting to include resource hungry real-time renders in them.

What I'm really looking out for level-designing wise is Gears of War for the PC (Epic have suggested they'd like to bring it to PC so many times I think there is some possibility they actually will do). Sure, I've not used the Unreal editors before, but I like the GoW game play that much I'd be willing to learn how to use the editor to make levels for the community. The problem I see, however, is that 90%+ of people who have it on console already will not buy it on PC, which coupled with my guess that Epic won't release it until after UT3 (because UT3 is more likely to be their big PC sale), means it probably won't have much of a community at all. GoW is another case of consoles bashing down PCs if you ask me, and the upcoming Halo 3 may be another big console hit too.

Right now all I would even think about making levels for is COD2 because it's one of my most played games at the moment. However, the competitive side has never gone anywhere much due to poorly competitive stock maps and a whole range of map and game play bugs. There are currently no COD2 maps I would consider game play worthy, and I have never seen any COD2 WIP posted on competitive player rich forums seeking suggestions. So bugs aside that should still give me reason to make levels for it, except that with the upcoming titles that will inevitably split communities even more, I think by the time I would finish a polished level there would be too small a competitive COD2 community left to play it.

[Lukin]

I think with first person shooters especially, developers are just running out of ideas. So many interesting story lines have already been done, and loads of different game play types have already been done, so in the end we just get the same old stuff. The only thing that seems to change majorly are the visuals, and with better visuals usually come more complex level design.

True, and unfotunately it's not only related to the shooters - I can't see any interesting game for me in the upcoming year. All the AAA titles seems to be a copy of same old schemes created 20 years ago. Some say that everything was already made, but IMHO there is a lot of things that can be invented or improved... My only concern is that most of the companies are heading into wrong direction with their projects: better visuals at all costs. The technology is so sophisticated today that you can do amazing things gameplay wise, yet all these ideas have to be sacrificed for another shader stage. That's why I wish all the best to Wii and Spore.

With a game like Quake 4 what I witnessed was a split between designers that were not pushing their skill base and those that have tried to extend their expertise. What resulted as the playing community remained small, was a handful of hardcore fans with their favourite maps, and most other designers becoming disenchanted with the effort of producing work that would receive little or no recognition. This doesn’t mean that Quake 4 is bad, it’s just that the nature of the game, the technology and hence the community had changed. Previously there was room for all.

Uhm, that's a little offtopic, but I have to disagree with this statement. I just don't see you point completely - there are some nice eye-candy levels made for "Q4" (for example Quaker-X's or Method's works) and they were recognized and warmly welcomed, even on ESR. Maybe these maps are not widely played on a servers, but well - it was the same way in "Q3". I can't see how you come to this "no room for some guys" statement.

[Kaz]

Actually, if you watch the videos released for Crysis, they've built the level editor to be somewhat drag n' drop-y, it looks pretty easy to build neat stuff with it.

[dnky]

Uhm, that's a little offtopic, but I have to disagree with this statement. I just don't see you point completely - there are some nice eye-candy levels made for "Q4" (for example Quaker-X's or Method's works) and they were recognized and warmly welcomed, even on ESR. Maybe these maps are not widely played on a servers, but well - it was the same way in "Q3". I can't see how you come to this "no room for some guys" statement.

It's not off topic at all. My point is simply that unless one is only interested in producing a level for the sake of enjoying the process, to map for a game that only a few are playing seems rather pointless. Quaker-x and Hexum have indeed produced some interesting content, but there is nothing on the scale of what has happened previously. Because the nucleus of support for this game is small and has narrow taste, that inevitably leads to a lack of diversity. Dont misunderstand me, I am not laying blame at any body's feet. This is one small factor of many. At the end of the day the video games industry, like any other business is driven by profit. If the profits are to be found in console titles, then the writing for the amateur is very much on the wall.

[d3mol!t!on]

Actually, if you watch the videos released for Crysis, they've built the level editor to be somewhat drag n' drop-y, it looks pretty easy to build neat stuff with it.

Actually, now you mention it, I did overlook that. Now I remember one video I saw where they just grabbed a road and changed the place it bent, then where the terrain had previously dipped down they just pulled it up to the level of the road. If it's that easy to design I'm up for it

[Silicone_Milk]

Indeed. That's why Im so eager to see what can be done with Crysis after it releases.

[obsidian]

Crysis editing reminds me of something like Lego blocks. Just stack and drag. It's not a bad thing, it does get more beginners involved with level editing. You don't need to know a lot about editors or how to manipulate polygons for optimization, etc. But I think this is limiting as far as creativity goes since you can't create the same level of uniqueness as brush based architecture.

In the same way, that's how I started off creating maps for Starcraft, "painting" terrain and creating triggers from drop down menus. Then I started to move to more complicated stuff like Half-Life, Team Fortress, Quake III, Quake 4.

ET:QW has a lot of extra tools built into ETedit (or whatever it's called) like the road and decal tools. In the same way, you can grab a road and change the curves by dragging. The megatexture creates the base terrain and you can add decals (scorch marks, cracks, etc.) with a stamp tool.

IMO, it's about time. Level editing on the community level is ridiculously hard for beginners and some things that should be simple really are not. I think ultimately a combination of Lego block, brush and model based techniques will be the perfect hybrid. Level editors need to get easier to use while remaining flexible enough for creativity to flow. Otherwise they will someday end up looking like full blown CAD software package.

Oh, and why is it that every level editor out there these days run like crap? Seems as if they are such memory hogs. Doom/Quake Edit, UT Editor, etc... they all seem to be so sluggish in comparison to GtkRadiant. They need to fix that.

[v1l3]

To start with...I love tlq3dm1 :icon25:


I've always found it odd that people think that Q3A would be dead after Q4 came out. There are still custom maps being made at somewhat of a regular pace that has existed over the last couple of years. The only places that the mappers are going for beta testing these days are at the Map-Center or ..::LvL's beta section. Practically no Q3 mappers here at the "Quake 3" World forums side, which is a go figure. The maps that are still being submitted over at ..::LvL are getting at most around 700 downloads which isn't as much as the past..but it isn't bad whatsoever. Tell me another game that even does that? The only thing that I miss are the ol' school map makers popping in one everyone in a while...and most of them are sitting right here on these forums. :icon28: At least there was a turtlemap mappack. :icon25:

[dnky]

Couldnt actually agree more. Q3 still more popular than Q4. Every time a company listens to consumers it gets it wrong. Henry Ford once said 'if I'd listened to the consumer I would have built a faster horse'.

[dichtfux]

Actually, if you watch the videos released for Crysis, they've built the level editor to be somewhat drag n' drop-y, it looks pretty easy to build neat stuff with it.

Yes, I've seen that video, too. I must admit I talked about it with a friend of mine and we were actually concerend about thousands of beautifull-looking but totally unplayable tropical island maps popping up out of thin air all around us as soon as the editor was available and some kids made their parents buy the required hardware for them. :icon32:

[ix-ir]

My point is that there are enough people to map for playing Q3 and with a buzz of scene activity more would return. There is huge scope for producing maps, so few good or even playable CTF and RA3 maps have been produced for example and if you set out to design a player-oriented, highgrade map for people to play on they'd use it. What people have said about gameplay is exactly the point - it's not developing for the most part, everything is there but hasn't been explored in sufficient depth.

How many good (as in clan game worthy) terrain CTF maps are there for Q3? How about for duel levels? People have these skills now that haven't been applied to maps that'd appeal to players for more than a FFA.

[obsidian]

How many good (as in clan game worthy) terrain CTF maps are there for Q3? How about for duel levels? People have these skills now that haven't been applied to maps that'd appeal to players for more than a FFA.

There have been excellent terrain and other styled maps made, but the problem is that they still get rejected by "pro-gamers" because it's not something that they've been trained to play. And if a new style makes them feel like a noob again, they simply won't touch it.

How many dedicated Q3 players are there that play on picmip 1 or 0 settings? I'm willing to bet that most play at ridiculous settings that makes impressive visuals created by the mapper pretty moot.

There is this double edged sword where mappers will create maps that are different that are never played, or create maps that conform to the same old boring formula that everyone hops on.

My $0.02, anyway.