PC gaming and mapping (split thread)

Discussion for Level editing, modeling, programming, or any of the other technical aspects of Quake
ix-ir
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 9:43 pm

Post by ix-ir »

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.
Would you link some, I've searched LvL and the nearest to playable I've seen is DieselRabbit's ice map. Most maps are rejected because they're not playable, usually because mappers are unaware how well players can use the railgun but also because of common mistakes like too many nooks and crannies. 'Progamers' (by this I really mean the highly competitive amateur scene in Q3 because the proscene plays anything put infront of them for money) are very interested in playable new maps, we've already had interested from the Produels Q3 tournament organiser in one of the maps we're working on. This is not a boast, as someone who tries to find good gameplay maps for mappacks I can tell you there are very few. The map in question, a rebuild of akumacpm1, is partly why I am interested in talking to mappers and getting them involved. This map was like a lot of the maps that get made - a nice layout with potential there but lacking that final level of gameplay polish that makes the difference between ignored and played to death. There are some very simple things that had to be done to that map that apply to the majority - losing pointless nooks, cleaning up the geometry, removing dead space and unnecessary routes and you end up with a map players like that on the face of it isn't all that different to the map you started with.

As to settings yes, most people play at high picmips, this doesn't nullify good mapping, people still load nice settings to look at the map, to watch demos and so on. What gets killed by picmip is a small part of making a good map.
dnky
Posts: 188
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:49 pm

Post by dnky »

If you want a certain map why not make it? This is one of the things that has been bugging me. If somebody is employing me I will make a map to order, otherwise I will make what I like.
Whatever....
ix-ir
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 9:43 pm

Post by ix-ir »

We are making maps, I'm not saying this to try to get a specific map built. My point is that there is a direction that a lot of you could go in making gameplay maps that'd bring some vitality back to mapping.

With the new technology what is a mapper that's not a modeller? Gameplay is the difference.

If you want an active scene and to attract players rather than to wander from game to game listlessly then it's up to the mappers, players and designers to build that scene. I'm trying to nudge you into thinking about building maps with those goals in mind.
dnky
Posts: 188
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:49 pm

Post by dnky »

This I understand, I was playing devil's advocate really. There is a danger in only trying to please your audience though. I dont think anyody would deny that the best maps marry aesthetics and gameplay. Its not one over the other. Each game has its own game related aspects: speed of movement, height of jumps etc. The mappers job is to build in mapping related play and interesting visuals.
Whatever....
poub_
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:50 pm

Post by poub_ »

I still map in Radiant 2.02 and I havent seen a reason to change yet. My longterm-goal clearly is on getting lots of people playing my maps though, which doesnt correlate with the editor or amount of models and shaders I use. But I'm getting snobby again :) I envy the mappers who make beautiful maps, quakerx and mrlake (burning reminders) have both made maps I still load up regularly, turn on s_ambient and just soak up the atmosphere.

In germany we have a saying, which is also very well known in the advertising world when it's about creativity and ads: "e wie einfach", "e like easy". Basically, idea comes first, and if the idea is gold, then the rest is hard work but will fall into the right place.

I think there are a ton of q3 maps which are the work of genius, however only few are made for competition. And that's ok. Truth be told, there were never all that many "competition mappers" around. But maybe today where there are even fewer, the time has come to tap into the huge reservoir of maps that are "almost there" and just need polishing. Or raise the awareness for gameplay issues.

What I could very well imagine is mappers churning out 2-texture-layouts, which after one or two revisions go through a pre-selection where a few get chosen, which then get turned into "real maps". All this by different people. It's industrialization, but would also cater to each talent: layout, finetuning/optimizing, eyecandy. Each can do what he loves most with a much higher productivity rate and less time bound by the other tasks in the map-making process.
dichtfux
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:51 pm

Post by dichtfux »

poub_ wrote:What I could very well imagine is mappers churning out 2-texture-layouts, which after one or two revisions go through a pre-selection where a few get chosen, which then get turned into "real maps". All this by different people.
I absolutely can't. There are lots of people out there who could make more beautifull things out of the layouts I do than I can do myself, but I don't want to do only a part of a map. I want to make the whole thing (call me selfish if you want to).

It's my map, I made it and this feels good. I've already done maps together with a friend and I'll soon do so again, but this form of industrialisation (and that's what it is) you mentioned (like a production line of specialized people I don't know) is definetly not what I am interested it. And I see no reason for it. The problem is not that a single person can't do it.

btw, to support ix: I try to map for gameplay btw and I recently went over to the cpm forums and really got some good comments on gameplay over there for my map. Good place to go. :icon14:
[color=#FFFFFF][url=http://maps.rcmd.org]my FPS maps[/url][/color]
v1l3
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 8:00 am

Post by v1l3 »

ix-ir wrote: a rebuild of akumacpm1
Did that map ever even go final? I have the cpma_akuma.pk3 beta version. Hmm
obsidian wrote:How many dedicated Q3 players are there that play on picmip 1 or 0 settings?
I used to stick to r_picmip 3 to 5 for the first five years just because I had such a shitty comp...which is why I was so hardcore in the whole gameplay-focused/plain-looking map theory...which was mostly done by the promode map makers. It was pretty necessary though considering the movement-speeds when bunny-hopping.
I finally bought a stronger pc, and started to notice how amazing the game was with r_picmip "0" and r_vertexlight "0". It blew my mind actually. I played for that long and never even saw what the game looked like. Now that I see it I never reduce graphics. If I could play for that long without good looks...I can't imagine ever getting sick of the game.
I think that there are alot of players that still exist though with crap-pc's. I downloaded wvwq3dm2...in what ever year that was, and finally was able to play it a year and a half ago. Talk about a shocker :icon28:

Gameplay maps are boring to me these days. I like to see a map that looks good with gameplay like pukka3tourney2/qfraggel3. Marsv1, burning1 like Poub mentioned, rjldm3!!!!!, lun3dm1, yog3dm6, cht3.

There's actually a guy that goes by the name Rascal that has been putting up beta's at the ..::LvL beta section that are mostly remakes, but some aren't and they are Doom3 styled for Q3 and I'd have to say that he's kickin alot of asses in the looks department..minded he makes them dark as hell..their fine at r_gamma "1.2" ...that's his choice though.

Even Scourge has a good one up.
corsair
Posts: 972
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 7:00 am

Post by corsair »

gameplay..... whats in it.. I get a feeling that people tend to think that gameplay is a static thing, that its fixed per game.. and that therefor a map has just one set of guidelines per gametype to conform to that gameplay...
Nothing is less true if you'd ask me... not the game defines gameplay, but the map does.. The problem seems to be that most maps try to fit to the gameplay that is supposedly defined by the game, instead of widening the gameplay posibilities within the game, by exploring the unexplored in mapping itself.
Kaz
Posts: 1077
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 3:43 am

Post by Kaz »

Beautiful corsair, beautiful.

:D
Silicone_Milk
Posts: 2237
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:49 pm

Post by Silicone_Milk »

corsair wrote: The problem seems to be that most maps try to fit to the gameplay that is supposedly defined by the game, instead of widening the gameplay posibilities within the game, by exploring the unexplored in mapping itself.
Some inspiring words there Corsair.
Silicone_Milk
Posts: 2237
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:49 pm

Post by Silicone_Milk »

d3mol!t!on wrote: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.

Well here's an idea I had last night for Quake 4....

I want to make a Q4 SP mod just to learn the engine.
There's really two ideas here. One is a blend of previous ideas. The other was me having a moment of nostalgia while thinking about Resident Evil.

First Idea: A government owned/operated hospital for military personnel is experimenting both biologically and mechanically on the people brought in. The experiments range vastly from a search for optimizations to the human body geared specifically towards front-line combat to virii testing to mind-control/brainwashing techniques.
The experiment project was shutdown and the hospital was closed. The nature of the old experiments had extended the life of many of the human guinea pigs but they were long since forgotten after the course of about 125 years.
The government sells the hospital to a medical company for research into improving existing prosthetics. As people went in to clean up the building and fix it up, fewer and fewer workers appeared in the morning for work. Those who did show, never actually went inside.

An archivist for the government meanwhile is mucking through old files and reading through them on his lunch break as he does every day since he's a huge bookworm. Yes, you guessed it. He finds documents on the experiment project. He reports the findings immediately.
In a response, a specialized extermination team is sent in (you are part of this team). Nobody knows what to expect...



I actually dont have time to post the second idea right now but I will later in the day today. I've gotta take care of something first.
poub_
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:50 pm

Post by poub_ »

"It's my map, I made it and this feels good. I've already done maps together with a friend and I'll soon do so again, but this form of industrialisation (and that's what it is) you mentioned (like a production line of specialized people I don't know) is definetly not what I am interested it. And I see no reason for it. The problem is not that a single person can't do it."

Maybe we have a different perspective. I work fulltime and have studies at the side, I'm working on most weekends as well. I usually switch on my pc at home every two days max just to check my mails and try to get some more sleep. But I still love mapping and want to contribute. And I'm in it for long enough that I know my strengths and weaknesses, which is a strong base in layouting and optimizing map structure, not so much texturing/lighting etc.

For me the scenario I described, of shared, linear map development by several different people, "moderated" by one person is perfect. I can still map and be productive without having to be there all the time, instead working in short but intense feedback sessions. I could also flesh out a raw layout and give it to that moderator, who could redistribute it among other people and see what they come up with. And do not mistake this for a "pass the map" which happens on forums, that's a different animal.

"The problem seems to be that most maps try to fit to the gameplay that is supposedly defined by the game, instead of widening the gameplay posibilities within the game, by exploring the unexplored in mapping itself."

That line isnt as clearly defined as you make it out to be imho. Cpm3/cpm1a and CPM is a good example. How much those maps influenced the mod and still influence the decisions about gameplay changes today is worth another nice discussion.

Gameplay has to be a fixed frame, but look at pro-dm6, ztn and pro-tourney4, how different they are played, I think there you have exactly what you're talking about already. But I agree with you, there is more to discover and map than what people have done yet. I trust there are enough young and old mappers around that will further push the envelope :)
Infernis
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:00 pm

Post by Infernis »

I always liked dressing up premade layouts ;)
Inf - Leaving in it's torturous wake nothing but vicious, cannabalistic, mutated, radiated and horribly disfigured hordes of satanic killers!
dichtfux
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:51 pm

Post by dichtfux »

poub_ wrote:Maybe we have a different perspective. I ...
Hehe, you can do whatever you want of course. Was a bit of a misunderstanding though, I thought you were suggesting this practise as a solution for the whole community/future of (non-professsional) mapping - because that's what this thread is about (kind of).
[color=#FFFFFF][url=http://maps.rcmd.org]my FPS maps[/url][/color]
Lunaran
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 1999 8:00 am

Post by Lunaran »

rgoer wrote: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
Another important point: remember Quake? Back when that was the only game, and everyone played it? and the gaming rags would constantly ask if such and such a game was the "Quake-Killer"?

The PC mod community has shrunk, but it probably hasn't shrunk as much as we think. It's just divided amongst a huge array of games now. Every game's mod community has become its own niche, whereas it used to be "you make strife maps? what a fucking weirdo."
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Post by wattro »

corsair wrote:gameplay..... whats in it.. I get a feeling that people tend to think that gameplay is a static thing, that its fixed per game.. and that therefor a map has just one set of guidelines per gametype to conform to that gameplay...
Nothing is less true if you'd ask me... not the game defines gameplay, but the map does.. The problem seems to be that most maps try to fit to the gameplay that is supposedly defined by the game, instead of widening the gameplay posibilities within the game, by exploring the unexplored in mapping itself.
nice and inspirational, but i don't entirely agree (and i haven't really thought this out entirely, just responding to my own initial reaction and leaving this out to the public to jump on).

take the rocket jump for example. it would not be possible without the engine (or actually, a bug). because movement is not constrained, you can do this in any map. now some maps take it to the next level and use the rocket jump in interesting ways.

the rocket jump is core to the quake experience (and not just quake). it's more memorable than any map (judging that more people know what a rocket jump is than identify with any specific map). other obvious examples are shooting through walls and double/ramp jumping, and probably more

hmm... as i think about it... gameplay really isn't well defined in this situation. so i guess i should agree and disagree at the same time (or maybe read the thread thoroughly). =)

i guess maps are one part of the equation, but i'd wager that bugs, glitches, and exploits of the engine/ai whatever are larger. however, mappers have very little control over this... so go nuts creating gameplay opportunity =)

obviously what you are getting at is that the mapper defines custom gameplay on a per map basis (or else we'd just have a pretty box map for every game out there, and let the engine, bugs, and whatever make the game for us).

i think truly widening the gameplay comes from understanding the engine and how to manipulate it so it does what you want. building this knowledge into maps is how you can capture that uniqueness and deliver "gameplay".

/did that make any sense?
//should really be drinking right now
Grudge
Posts: 8587
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 8:00 am

Post by Grudge »

What about Q4Max? Wouldn't that be the "ideal" environment for "old" Q3 mappers?

They have the gameplay competencies of cpma, through arQon (while sometimes being a somewhat of a dick, I have the impression that he's a very competent coder/modder) and swelt, one of the best "gameplay mappers" around.

Then there's the visual potential of the Doom3 engine, with the dynamic lighting and materials, enabling "visuals mappers" to go crazy on the detailing.

Unfortunately, looking at their forums, Q4Max activity seems to have fallen asleep together with the rest of the Q4 community the last couple off months.
o'dium
Posts: 11712
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 8:00 am

Post by o'dium »

I think its more to the point that Quake 3 runs on just about anything these days. Fuck I have it running on my PSP for gods sake...

But Quake 4 needs quite a beffy expensive system.

It was "sorta" the same when Quake 3 came out, nobody could run it. But people forced themselves into lower quality configs before they upgraded because it was so good. Quake 4 however, sucks on all levels. Its a poor god awful single player game, and the MP, while now patched up a lot, isn't anywhere near as good as Quake 3 was. People just see this, as well as the expensive upgrade needed, and think "well, sod it..." and go off to other things.

The main problem with the game is the lighting system, if it wasn't for PPL, it would look a LOT better, and be a LOT smoother. Quake 4 isn't exactly the best looking game ever, in fact in some places it looks very last gen in terms of art and design, box rooms etc. But it still chugs away at your frame rate because of the shadows.

If you want a decent multiplayer game, you need to ditch the damn ppl. Work from static lightmap again or better shadow mapping, just not the PPL used in Doom. Its just no good for fast gaming and you cant tweak it a lot without "cheating".
Grudge
Posts: 8587
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 8:00 am

Post by Grudge »

ix-ir wrote:http://www.promode.org
dude, lol?
dichtfux
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:51 pm

Post by dichtfux »

Grudge wrote:What about Q4Max? Wouldn't that be the "ideal" environment for "old" Q3 mappers?
I always mean q4max when I say q4 in a MP context. Think I never joined a non-q4max q4 server.

But it doesn't make such a difference for mappers so I don't see your point (or am I overlooking something)?
o'dium wrote:Quake 4 however, sucks on all levels. (...) People just see this, as well as the expensive upgrade needed, and think "well, sod it..." and go off to other things.
Agreed.

I decided that I'll give ET:QW a try and pre-ordered it, but whether I'll really do much for/with it (like play it) will depend mostly on whether it runs good enough for MP on my system or not.
[color=#FFFFFF][url=http://maps.rcmd.org]my FPS maps[/url][/color]
g0th-
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 7:57 pm

Post by g0th- »

I think ET:QW can bring together a lot of mappers, Perhaps not as much as quake3 but from what I read their is defently a need for a lot of mapper for making content. The downside is that mapping for the game dosn't seems to be a one map job anymore.
[url]http://www.g0th.se[/url]
dichtfux
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:51 pm

Post by dichtfux »

g0th- wrote:The downside is that mapping for the game dosn't seems to be a one map job anymore.
?

Did you mean one man job?
[color=#FFFFFF][url=http://maps.rcmd.org]my FPS maps[/url][/color]
ix-ir
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 9:43 pm

Post by ix-ir »

Grunge: if the lol is about the dancing gif we're moving hosts at the moment.

I doubt ET:QW will bring together a major mapping scene because it's too hard to map for for anyone other than a very experienced and determined mapper. Terrain maps for many players, even with good tools are hard work compared to little box maps that suit beginners.
Last edited by ix-ir on Tue May 22, 2007 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
o'dium
Posts: 11712
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 8:00 am

Post by o'dium »

Actually, ET:QW is pretty much as simple as it gets for mapping. Terrain is made pretty much how you want it with a few settings, textures are applied automaticly, and everything else is map model or stamp tool, so its pretty much fast.

You could probably churn out a half decent map in a day.
g0th-
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 7:57 pm

Post by g0th- »

dichtfux wrote:
g0th- wrote:The downside is that mapping for the game dosn't seems to be a one map job anymore.
?

Did you mean one man job?
Yeah I ment man :) guess I were thinking off other things when I wrote it
Post Reply