How many of you are considering id tech 5 mapping?

[EmeraldTiger]

With the advent of Rage dawning ever so closer, many of you are beginning to speculate if you are going to design for it or not. Despite the engine`s complexity, I heard it won`t be as painstaking as one may think, with megatextures doing the wrapping for you and a paintbrush-like tool which allows you to place small objects like plants without all the hassle of copying and pasting.

With this I may consider it, although I heard you`ll need to learn modeling to create quality content. Fortunately I got Blender and have toyed around with it, and most likely I`ll stick to making race tracks (if I do get the game and build for it) for the racing multiplayer mode, as that most likely won`t require as many buildings, and therefore less modeling. Plus I think like with other games you can use the stock models. (Like I can stick a gas station here, put trees here, etc.)

So are you considering it? Or are you sticking to previous id techs?

(Poll will run for 43 days, ending around the time Rage comes out)

[nick lol]

I will probably wait until Doom 4 / Quake 5 and see if I still gots the mojo

[Hipshot]

It's pretty easy to consider something =)

[Noruen]

It depends if my computer will be enough strong to run all these development stuff. I'm not happy from what you said, because it is move to more unreal-ish mapping. Are there official system requirements?

[flipout]

I'll be mapping for multiplayer too. building tracks and cars. I already started modeling one of the cars I wanted to make. I just hope the map size isn't going to be huge. I think quake wars was like 500 megs and that was just 32k x 32k.

[o'dium]

What makes you think you will be able to add anything such as this? The games much more closed off I hear than previous id titles, so adding cars may be a stretch (Something I would like to be wrong on).

With regards to mapping, you would need the source assets to make mega textures anywhere close to the same level of detail as the stock maps. You also need high poly modelling experience too, you can't just use a bsp map, the world is a mesh for the most part. That means building your world out of a high poly source mesh and letting the mega texture (In combination with using another app, that you have you buy,. to create erode masks)...

In short what I'm trying to say is that if you are going from Q3 to that, you won't stand a chance. If you are going from D3 to that, you won't stand much of a chance, either. If you are going from ET:QW you will be prepared, but its still going to be a huge leap as ET:QW contained a single MT asset and used a lot of really shitty old school almost Q2 level brush work.

This is a new ball game, and I'm sad to say but its gonna be VERY hard for even pros of both mapping AND modelling combined to get something usable and even half decent out of it.

[obsidian]

There will be some SDK stuff and the tools will ship with the game as announced.

True about the megatextures, there is a lot of data and I'm not sure how id Software intends to distribute that if at all. Nothing really stops you from using traditional textures though.

Brush based solids are still a large part of idTech 5 and you are free to use them if you wish. Mesh based solids do play a larger part of the terrain and details but that's not to say that you can't build a traditional indoor "bunker" map as we do now. Creating erosion isn't mandatory and there are many ways of doing it with normal modeling tools and plugins, extra tools just automates much of that process.

Building maps for idTech 5 will have it's challenges, that's a fact. The plus side is that they've done a lot of changes in idStudio to empower the artists, unlike Radiant where you'll need a text editor just to write a surface shaded or to write a scripted sequence, or a batch file just to compile, all that stuff is now built-in.

It will be very hard to create a professional looking level on any modern game engine -- so will you be able to make a custom map on idTech 5? Yes, but very unlikely able to match the quality of the game which has a whole team of people working on it at the same time. That alone doesn't mean people shouldn't try, or that they won't be able to still make a compelling game experience.

[Rav3n]

I think the main problem is that people still approach level design as individuals.
One man probably doesn't stands a chance in tech 5 but half a dozen or more, working on one map?
Divide and conquer, in this case divide the work load.

[dONKEY]

I want use idtech5. I have the same concerns as many of the above though.
With QW I was one of the first to work out how to create a functioning megatexture. I really wanted to create a playable level. I very soon realised though to design a level on my own to the level of quality I wanted would take about a year. After a year would there still be anybody interested in playing my map? Even now I can spend three months on a q3 level an have between 200 and 500 people download it.
I think most hobby designers myself included map for themselves, but the reward is still exposure.
I fear, an u do hope I'm wrong. Rage may face the same issues as idtech4 based games. Lack of longevity and fanbase means the learning curve faced by hobbyist mappers just isn't worth it.
Mapping as a team could be an answer, but as everyone that's worked on a collaborative project knows, working with people that do this part time and for the love of game design tends to lead to frustration as members of the team inevitably drop out.

[DaEngineer]

Brink didn't run on lowest settings on my machine, so I guess Rage won't do either. And I'm really sick of spending money for new hardware.

But even if I had the necessary hardware, I'd stick to Quake 3. After years of practicing and learning I finally know the GtkRadiant well enough to have routine and can - technically - realize all the stuff I have always wanted to do when I 've begun to map. Using the new idTech5 would mean starting all over and having to use custom models. The modeling part wouldn't be the problem, but when it comes to texturing... the only model I've made a texture for is the backpack model for the EntityPlus mod, and that's not the kind of high-quality content Rage uses.

I don't think I'll map for another game or engine in the next time. I've tried UT2004, Half-Life 2 and CS:S. The Source Engine has by far more similarities to Quake 3 than Unreal has, but none of them has this certain Quake feeling of complexity carried by simplicity. idTech3, in my eyes, is easy to learn, hard to master and the more rewarding the deeper you dig. And as I'm still not tired of old school arena fights - why should I switch?

[o'dium]

To be fair, Brink doesn't run that great full stop, and the lowest has hardly any impact on frame rate compared to highest. Its a strange title is Brink, theres some odd bottleneck there that really makes the game feel laggy and slow...

Rage on the other hand is a true Carmack coded title. Its going to feel snappy and responsive at even low frame rates I'm sure. Plus the fact it runs a constant 60FPS on consoles is a sure sign that it will run nice on PC. I fully expect to be able to load up Rage and whack everything to max with some AA and not miss a beat.

[phantazm11]

I fully expect to be able to load up Rage and whack everything to max with some AA and not miss a beat.

Man, I hope you are right. My computer is no slouch, but I'm with DaEngineer...tired of thinking about upgrading every year.