Func_Msgboard: Thought 3 - So Why Don`t You Lot Map For More Recent Games Then??

News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Register | Log in

|  | Thought 3 - So Why Don`t You Lot Map For More Recent Games Then??

Posted by Shambler [210.86.110.175] on 2003/04/29 00:14:23

(Apart from Vondur at least he mapped for RTCW).
Sooooo, getting two vibes here....firstly a lot of you guys play recent games (by recent I guess I mean since Q3A/UT, yup I`m measuring game epochs by when Id games are released hmmm), and secondly although some people think mapping for more recent games is as problematic as I suggest, some of you don`t. Thus, why doesn`t anyone here map for anything more recent than Q3A/UT?
A few ideas:
A lot of you do but you map in a professional basis for a proper company (usually making console games it seems heh).
Or you play recent games but you`re not inspired to map for them as you have more ideas and more creative freedom in older games.
Or a lot of the recent games you player are mappable/editable.
Or my issue about the increased purposeless of mapping is quite pertinent after all.
Or....???

I'll Use The S. Sam Icon Since I Make A Brief Reference To The Game
#1 posted by R.P.G. [24.136.232.28] on 2003/04/29 00:25:33
EA killed Rogue and the tools for Alice were never released so I can't map for that.
I seriously wanted to make a map or set of maps for Duke Nukem: Manhattan Project, but that got lost somewhere, and I have so many maps I want to make for Quake that I figure I'll just stay where I am.
I have no idea if The Thing was mappable or not, but UGH! Who would want to map for that?!
Serious Sam 1/2 were fun, but I don't think I would have found them fun enough to map for.
NOLF was cool, but I prefer to map for sci fi or fantasy settings instead, even though the gameplay itself isn't so realistic.
Black & White wasn't mappable, but considering that I got bored of it and never finished it, that's a moot point.
Although I haven't played the full version of Enclave yet (blaragh just two weeks until finals are over) I would map for it. However, there is some question as to whether the tools will actually be released. (/me stares at wrath.)
I think that covers just about all the games I have that were released post Q3.
Actually
#2 posted by R.P.G. [24.136.232.28] on 2003/04/29 00:27:06
Black & White was mappable, wasn't it?
/me = silly
Black & White
#3 posted by H-Hour [12.252.47.32] on 2003/04/29 02:48:19
was it mappable? maybe.
did the voices and creature AI like to quit on me every 15 minutes? yes.
Rpg
#4 posted by wrath [195.58.111.103] on 2003/04/29 03:40:28
"(/me stares at wrath.)"
keep staring, I cannot see it anyway. what with the sunglare of my porshe and all.
seriously, I dont even have a car - I just dont give a fuck.
still, there is some pressure from the community, as it were, to release the tools - but we have more pressing matters at hand right now. as I said - when I know something, you lot will be the first I will tell. Or my mom, its either or...
I Think...
#5 posted by pope [207.6.192.37] on 2003/04/29 04:49:59
...alot of people are holding back, waiting for the release of Doom 3 and some proper tools to work with it.
Im not one of them... Im one of those people waiting to save up enough for a new computer all together first...
Beh
#6 posted by Vondur [195.128.65.237] on 2003/04/29 06:13:31
i`m waiting for doom 3 creating two quake sp maps ;)
all other games quickly getting too boring to map for. maybe doom3 will be boring too, then i`ll continue mapping for quake...
Hmmm....
#7 posted by Gom Jabbar [212.93.3.169] on 2003/04/29 07:22:49
Quake. Tasty. Good.
Reminds me of that 'too many leafs visible' error that drove me mad yesterday...
Title
#8 posted by Scampie [216.220.241.97] on 2003/04/29 08:32:44
Alice, Serious Sam, and RTCW are the only more recent games I own, and I attempted RTCW mappery until I decided that a) it was far too realistic b) I`m not really into ww2 recreation maps and c) my few attempts with the scripting produced only unworking errors and problems. I also played with Serious Sam mapping, but I lost interest in the game before I could learn the editor enough to make more than box maps.
And Alice didn`t really hold my intrest anyway, even if I could map for it, the only thing it had going for it was neat maps, and I can make those in q3.
I`d be interested in trying u2 or ut2k3 and mapping them due to their nicer engines, but my current setup can`t handle them at any speed, and most of the reviews haven`t been glowing.
I Like To Code For Quake
#9 posted by Wazat [144.38.206.24] on 2003/04/29 10:54:01
I don`t do much mapping for Quake1, but I do love to play Jeht and normal quake deathmatch on other people`s quality custom maps. Quake has a solid and simplistic feel that many other games struggle to emulate, what with the imbalance of graphics and wow factor pulling them in the wrong direction.
Quake coding is similar. It`s simple, powerful, and solid feeling. I can do so many things with Quake, and I know all kinds of tricks that I can use to get what I want.
Despite what people think, changing games isn`t just changing a few bits of syntax or style and then you`re off. With either coding or mapping, the code (or map editor) you use is going to be drastically different. Sure, you`ve learned the basics; but that`s an Associates degree and you`ve got to start over on your new Masters. Once you`ve got that figured out (and it`ll be a while trust me), then you`ve got to get a feel for the game itself. You`ll spend the next few months or year utterly failing and learning from it. You`ve got to learn all the traps and foolish tricks newbies pull so you can avoid them. You have to learn the tricks for creating what you want. It`s all there and you`re going to be struggling for a very long time. And you`re not on high demand either. You`re just one of a thousand pigeons flocking to the new games, falling over and trampling eachother to gobble up a few pieces of bread. And then the next new game will come out.
To me, quake1 is an excellent medium for me to carry out my purposes - enjoying a hobby. After all, I`m not being paid money or recognition for what I do; it`s for my own entertainment and the benefit of a small, close community.
The Tools
#10 posted by pushplay [24.86.74.102] on 2003/04/29 18:10:59
I think the best way to solve the problem of adjusting to new mapping tools is just for everybody to use the same tools. Unless you're doing something exotic in your engine GtkRadiant should be modifiable to do whatever you want. Half the work is done for the coders, mappers (pro and otherwise) get something they know how to use, and game companies would be willing to pitch in some support for the project. That's win win win.
#11 posted by Vodka [81.3.154.33] on 2003/04/29 23:20:35
maybe ppl map for the same game out of habbit ?
...like some coders keep on coding for c64
Thx For Your Thoughts So Far...
#12 posted by Shambler [210.86.110.175] on 2003/04/30 01:38:56
Esp. RPG and Scampie...
It seems lack of proper tools are an issue too...
Von, why are recent games boring to map for?
Shamb
#13 posted by Vondur [195.128.65.237] on 2003/04/30 04:40:21
not mapping is boring but the games themselves.
the result of mapping isn`t that satisfying as with quake because your map looks exactly like original game (read aard`s speech). it`s very hard to make the map look original with modern games.
Speaking Of Aard...
#14 posted by pope [63.145.188.20] on 2003/04/30 16:16:46
lots of cube mapping is going on... does cube count as a `new` game?
tho it may seem a step back compared to fancier engines, its certainly very user friendly, it must be doing something right as there is alot of community around it.
Also new games feel like they don`t create a community. Games like Medal of Honor and Battlefield 1942 that don`t even allow you to map for it. They are missing out on a large part of their community by selling expansion packs and not providing any tools for custom content.
Is there any data on whether custom content hurts or helps the sales of expansion packs?
hmmm im off topic now...
Blackpope
#15 posted by wrath [217.211.83.31] on 2003/04/30 17:04:28
the people who make and play custom content is a very small fragment of the established userbase of any given game, so my guess is that they help sales, by word of mouth.
BP
#16 posted by pushplay [24.86.74.102] on 2003/04/30 18:35:12
I think the more important part (from a popularity standpoint) of a community is the tourney kids. They're a vociferous group whom newbies are likely to want to be like and play what they play.
Aye
#17 posted by pope [63.145.188.20] on 2003/04/30 19:36:49
do games like MOH and BF1942 have alot in the way of `tourney` leagues?
I myself haven`t delved into that "community" whatsoever so Im unawares as to whats going on in that dept. But with the only "new content" available being through "patches" and "expansions" I`m sure its a whole different ballgame as everyone is limited to those 14 maps that came with the game, those 2 more in the latest patch and the 8 you get in the expansion for another 40$
Maybe I should look into this more myself... but do I care? <wink>
Hmmm
#18 posted by DaZ [212.159.32.126] on 2003/05/01 21:47:13
my opinion, newer games just arent as good as Quake :)
I mean with Quake you can build anything you like and it works, with newer games they are much more focused on a set theme and narrative that is hard to escape from. I believe Doom3 will suffer from this, but not as much as games like unreal2/nolf/avp2 etc...
Disagreement
#19 posted by R.P.G. [24.136.188.169] on 2003/05/01 21:51:03
"I mean with Quake you can build anything you like and it works, with newer games they are much more focused on a set theme and narrative that is hard to escape from. I believe Doom3 will suffer from this, but not as much as games like unreal2/nolf/avp2 etc..."
On the other hand, I believe that Doom 3 is going to suffer from very restrictive gameplay. At least, if the gameplay movies are any indication. The gameplay looks like it's going to be so specific that you will be forced to map for a certain play style, which looks like it will be difficult to pull off and will get old faster than other play styles.
Right On Rpg
#20 posted by Vodka [81.3.170.156] on 2003/05/02 00:59:33
thats the problem with many games - restrictive gameplay. Add restrictive style and you got it - game with not much freedom for creative maps
So Why Don`t You Lot Map For More Recent Games Then??
#21 posted by NotoriousRay [209.163.111.207] on 2003/05/02 20:59:42
a: only quake has idbase
Seriously Tho
#22 posted by NotoriousRay [209.163.111.207] on 2003/05/02 21:29:06
quake1 gives me/us a full development kit: we have game code (quakec) to mess around with, loads of existing custom textures (quite easy to edit/modify/add/etc), a large assortment of tools/utilities making tasks even easier, and a good amount of options when it comes to actually building maps. not to mention the actual engine code if/when i ever get a chance to really mess with that.
but personally, besides all that, i`m just not interested in newer games. no game has grabbed me to the point of where i actually go to the efforts of mapping for it (wolf came close, but i found it too restrictive). i dont know if there is an editor with C&C generals (id think so, given previous C&C games` inclusion), as i will be picking that game up soon as i get new system built.
Why Don`t You Lot Map For More Recent Games Then?
#23 posted by Vodka [217.195.95.201] on 2003/05/04 00:51:10
Cause of hanging on irc, trolling messageboards, and uhhm .. playing so called "recent games" in rather limited free time ?
m8 8 cr8
RE: Speaking Of Aard...
#24 posted by Aardappel [217.7.138.114] on 2003/05/05 06:55:44
well, cube was made as an "editor centric engine" from the start, because I am a mapper myself and wanted something which would allow me to build stuff even more "direct" than quake. I also recognized that getting levels would generally be the biggest obstactle for an entirely new engine/game, and looking at the amount of maps for cube I think I made the right bet :)
Yes
#25 posted by daftpunk [147.197.200.13] on 2003/05/05 10:24:20
you did indeed :-)
?
#26 posted by pushplay [24.86.74.102] on 2003/05/05 16:46:10
<quote>getting levels would generally be the biggest obstactle for an entirely new engine/game</quote>
Good foresight. But why don't you map more for your own game?
You Know, We`re All Old.
#27 posted by Wazat [144.38.162.44] on 2003/05/05 17:01:00
Our generation of gaming has passed. Now we`re the old farts talking about "back in my day". Gaming has moved on to something less fulfilling, less valuable. Maps will become more and more hollow in gameplay or less and less diverse. We`re just a bunch of old fogies telling the yungsters how things should be.
We`re right, but I doubt they`ll ever listen.
Bah, what a terrible mood I`m in. :)
I think that no matter how bad it gets, there will still be people mapping. It`s only the quality of maps that we have to lose.
Actually
#28 posted by Kell [82.41.48.30] on 2003/05/05 18:37:11
I think it's more likely to be quantity of maps that will drop, while quality will be high, because only the really dedicated mappers will stick at it as a hobby.
Pushplay
#29 posted by Aardappel [217.7.138.114] on 2003/05/06 06:54:44
good question... but remember that I am always more of a coder than a mapper. Why I ever managed to create so many quake maps is anybodies guess :)
I think I prefer creating the possibilities of great maps, and then watch on as other people make them. I am a decent mapper, but in no way can I compete with the best of them... what people like goetz & metlslime did with cube is just beyond my capabilities. Though I still think aard3 is one of the best maps in terms of pure gameplay :)
About Aard3
#30 posted by pushplay [24.86.74.102] on 2003/05/06 19:53:40
Agreed.
Ur Editor Aint A Ediotr For Aliens Vs Preds 2
#31 posted by THE |)£\/i&#9616; [68.235.12.168] on 2004/05/01 13:59:45
fuck u assholes i need a game editor so i can float and shit get back 2 me when u have 1 fuck this is it sucks!!
#32 posted by Scampie [66.231.198.188] on 2004/05/01 15:00:37
what
#32
#33 posted by HeadThump [65.141.72.201] on 2004/05/01 16:18:50
What crack idled mind came up with that shit.
I Mean #31
#34 posted by HeadThump [65.141.72.201] on 2004/05/01 16:19:39
But seconding #32
I Don't Know What That Guy Wanted
#35 posted by pushplay [68.148.158.216] on 2004/05/01 16:27:13
But with english like that I'm just as happy he didn't get it.
I Think He Was After An AvP2 Editor
#36 posted by Fat Controller [203.97.2.242] on 2004/05/01 18:14:38
But of course, it's very hard to write coherently with pimples on your eyes.
As for the original topic, I'm starting to noodle with Radiant and Unrealed, but I have a long way to go before I get anything bearable.
And if I get this job I'm interviewing for tomorrow, I won't have all that much time anymore.
Hmm
#37 posted by DaZ [212.159.60.58] on 2004/05/01 19:54:45
well I would say that to map for a game and actually get to the point where you can release that map takes a lot of love for the game on the mappers part, and frankly newer games just dont give me that love any more.
I've played around with UnrealED, the Far Cry sandbox (wicked editor!) , gtk radiant etc but the games attached to these editors just dont pull me in ENOUGH to carry through to completion of custom maps. I've started a few ut2k3/4 maps, and a far cry map. Will they ever be finished - probably not, because the appeal of the game just isn't great enough to give me the drive to spend hours of my life making content for it.
Quake on the otherhand has had in by the throat for years now, just when I think I'm starting to tire of the old girl someone will release a new texture set, map, mod, engine, whatever and the inspiration will come flooding back.
Another factor would be time, in Quake you can throw brushes around and create a couple of rooms with full lighting etc in an hour or two, with say q3 engine games and higher it takes a lot more time to achieve the level of quality set for that particular game, some people just dont have the kind of time and it puts them off. This might make Quake mapping sound like a "quick fix" but no, idiot! Its not. Its also refreshing NOT having to worry about shaders, multiple passes, compatibility etc because quake has no issues with any of these, and thats a lot less headaches for the mappers...
Short answer - I still only map for Q1 because its my favourite game, newer games just aren't as cool. :D
Dedication And RtCW Mapping
#38 posted by Tef Johs [80.212.39.96] on 2004/05/02 17:42:09
Heh, so this is where everybody went? (Wavey).
Since I have released maps for 3 different games (Quake, Quake II, and RtCW), I feel I know something about the dedication for a game it would take to finish a project and release it, especially when multiple maps are involved, and you're a one man 'team'.
'Operation Vorsichtig' (2002) for RtCW took me about 7 months to complete, and I didn't feel it was restricted as some seem to believe. It was a very fun game to map for, and I loved exploring all the new aspects related to the Q3 engine, compared to Q1/2. I must say I have a very fond feeling thinking back on that huge project. The games coming out after RtCW, however, I've found much more restricted. None of these I have found worthy picking up an editor for. Games like 'Medal of Honour' or 'Call of Duty' would almost force you to replicate their exact gaming experience.
Unreal Mapping
#39 posted by WyldeSnake [69.133.75.190] on 2004/05/02 20:19:18
Blows. The controls are pretty hard to get used to, the tutorials on the internet eat cheese, and it's all very confusing.
At least the results look pretty. Too bad all 3 times I've tried to learn UnrealEd I got so confused at how to SELECT a damn brush/box/constructor/doodad, and failed because the tutorial writer assumed I knew how to do it.
It's not like the editor has a SELECT button or anything useful like that. I'm just supposed to figure it out. >:O
Quake mapping (and Q2, even though it wasn't as good a game) on the other hand are pretty straightforward to get into. The limited features available due to the engine keeps things simple, so you can concentrate more on what you want to do instead of making all the really cool features work.
Did You Try Wolf's UnReal
#40 posted by HeadThump [65.140.55.48] on 2004/05/02 22:17:39
http://unreal.gamedesign.net/
Personally, I think once the interface of UnRealEd feels second nature to you it isn't such a bad editor. Importation of DXF or t3d files for the interior modeling has us Quake mappers beat in that area. There is a collection of most of the major t3d models from Deus Ex (like Lebedev's 757) you can use for first rate prefabs. There are importers for .map files; so you can carve out a space and import your Quake work. So on the balance of things I find it to my liking.
What A Splendid Thread!
#41 posted by Shambler [82.38.194.13] on 2004/05/03 06:24:57
P.S. Interesting answer Daz.
<--fat Man W. A Shiny Ass Pulling Up His Pants
#42 posted by pjw [63.236.226.222] on 2004/05/03 13:50:38
For me, it's just a matter of only x hours in the day.
I mapped for Doom, then Q2, then Q3 (somehow missing mapping for Q1--yeah, I know, I'm a worthless swine), but each time, learning new techniques and a new editor ate up a fair chunk of time, and there's only so much time available to map + play. I'll probably be mapping for Doom 3, and already am for Q4 (life is good), but that's a given since I'll know the tools.
I've been tempted to map for Far Cry; I like that game more than any shooter I've played in quite a while, but probably won't, only because there's too much other shit I want to do right now (finish Far Cry, play Painkiller, continue to make maps for Trackmania (which is a really great game if you like puzzle and/or racing games, and the editor is very simple and intuitive, which helps)).
Short form: I'm just really picky, considering the time investment that mapping (well) for a game takes.
The Tools Releationship
#43 posted by ProdigyXL [216.111.202.25] on 2004/05/03 16:07:32
It really comes down to the editor and the engine. Quake is simple. The tools are all straight foward, and the engine is simple. You have entities, textures, and brushes. That is all you really have to worry about in Quake. In the newer games you have the technology to restless with. Take Call of Duty for example. It is a Quake III engine game and uses relatively fimiliar editor for most in the community, however no one here has released anything for it. It is because you have so much more to do in order to make a map playable. You have shaders, terrian, caulking, curves, more advanced lighting techniques with Q3Map, models, and on and on. Now throw in a new and unfimiliar editor and it's even more difficult to start to map with.
For the most part I expect most of the community to dable in Doom III, I will myself. What I question though is if we will start to latch on to this new engine, or get sick of messing around with the technology and return our simple Quake. If there is a game to do this it's either Doom III or Half-Life 2.
When Quake III Arean first launched I remember myself creating a test map that was just an experience in frustration. There was so much more to accomplish in order to get the map to run and look good. Editing tools in my opinion need to take a step toward being more automated in certain functions so the designer isn't side tracked into the smaller stuff. (If that makes any sense.)
Doom III will hopefully be a little easier to map for given that the editor is built into the game code, and the lighting is rendered in real time. If the maps still need to be compiled for one reason or another, I hope that it isn't as daughting a task as it looks. id Software must understand the value of a good editor as it is looking to hire another coder just for that. If the tools become too complexe ameatures (sp) such as ourselves will be turned off. Everyone knows that a good modding community can the extend the shelf life of games by years. (See Half-Life) In that respect it would be a poor business decision to make the games overly complex map/mod for.
Finally as pjw mentioned, time is valuable and increasingly it takes much longer to create a map in a new engine. Tools must start saving the designer time, or new design techniques within the community will have to be created. An exmaple such as Vondor's and czg's latest remix of E1M1 is an example. Map's will become group projects themselves in order to save time. While this is great, I just find it another thing to juggle... :/
Hopefully tho, something will change and we will start seeing custom maps from this community for a range of games. We all complained about id orginal levels for Quake at some point, but we took the game and made it better. I'm sure there are some quality titles out there that deserve that kind effort.
Confluence Of Events
#44 posted by HeadThump [65.140.54.25] on 2004/05/03 18:11:49
It is the versatility of the Single Player Quake game that I find ideas popping up in my head all the time and this has been true for only two other games, Thief and Dues Ex. So the fact Quake 3 Arena was DM is the main reason I have never mapped for it. I still find Quake 2 to be interesting and I have done Machinima work in it as it a great format for that genre.
Also Elite Forces was a good game that I wanted to do some mapping for when it came out, but at the time I was in a 'committed' relationship and I found myself watching more Julia Roberts movies than playing games. Horrible, horrible time.
The other Single Player Games that used Q3 technology RoTCW I have never played and Jedi Knight 2 sucked rotten sewege. Hated that game with a passion born in the deepest bowels of the hell beast, mainly because of the stupid not even worthy of the Sci-Fi channel cut scenes and poor level design.
Amen
#45 posted by R.P.G. [24.136.230.101] on 2004/05/03 18:21:40
Jedi Knight 2 sucked rotten sewege... because of the stupid not even worthy of the Sci-Fi channel cut scenes and poor level design.
Painkiller Looks Good To Map For
#46 posted by WyldeSnake [69.133.75.190] on 2004/05/03 21:58:49
Because of the variety of the monsters and environments...too bad the guns are pretty limited in selection and there's no RJ
Was JK2
#47 posted by Zwiffle [68.78.50.17] on 2004/05/03 22:38:05
Jedi OutCast or Jedi Academy? OutCast I admit had horrible level design imo, some levels were too hard (sniper level) and some of the puzzles took me forever just to find out there was a puzzle there.
Zwiffle
#48 posted by HeadThump [65.140.55.61] on 2004/05/04 00:54:24
Definitely Outcast. I have never played Jedi Academy.
Pk
#49 posted by necros [69.193.41.176] on 2004/05/04 02:19:09
rjumping is disabled in single player. it would make getting some secrets too easy.
also, mapping for pk looks to be very difficult, considering the whole game was designed in maya... :(
New Games
#50 posted by pope [207.6.21.28] on 2004/05/04 02:44:23
take/are going to take alot more time, effort & variety of skills (modelling, shaders, scripting) to deliver content that is of quality at least equal to the release.
the act of a solo mapper producing such material is a much more daunting & time consuming task now. we need to start forming groups just to output 1 map!
Necros
#51 posted by Mr Fribbles [203.113.193.39] on 2004/05/04 05:46:48
also, mapping for pk looks to be very difficult, considering the whole game was designed in maya... :(
That'd be fine, if they released the tools that they used or whatever you need to get a file from maya into their own formats etc. It is my understanding that they haven't done that and won't be doing so, correct me if I'm wrong.
...
#52 posted by necros [69.193.41.176] on 2004/05/04 12:24:13
to be precise, they haven't done that, and won't be doing so for a little while.
i've heard the PCF guys saying that 'later' they will release some SDK stuff. The map editor plugin things should come before that though. I don't have any specific dates though.
...
#53 posted by sark [211.29.136.13] on 2004/05/05 05:22:12
this thread is interesting
i for one would love some of the old quake mapppers to make some 2k4 maps, the really "hardcore" mappers in ut that make duel/dm maps have zero clue whatsoever.. there are no maps along the lines of anything on prominence (just an example, i was browsing that particular site reminissing a few days ago).. unreal maps blow as far as gameplay is concerned, and user maps blow harder as a general rule. of course the games are completly different so youd expect a fair few differences, but come on.. some nice atrium maps wouldnt go astray, the majority seem to be locked into 2 floors only, and teleporters are a nono (apparently cliffyb said they were bad for flow once, so noone uses them)
blah
thanks for letting me bitch :)
Necros
#54 posted by MisYu [83.29.79.43] on 2004/05/07 05:31:02
"I don't have any specific dates though."
Never believe what A.Ch. says =)
Un Real
#55 posted by spentron [4.152.222.212] on 2004/05/07 09:43:20
"thats the problem with many games - restrictive gameplay. Add restrictive style and you got it - game with not much freedom for creative maps"
Bullshit. There is no restrictive style. You can make anything you want with the bits there. Games are not restrictive. People are restrictive. Consider RtCW, I don't know the maps, but I don't remember Raiders of the Lost Ark seeming like a typical WW2 movie and that had Nazis in it. I can see it a concievable fantasy to have Nazis on spaceships. Put them in a Coagula map if you can make it fun, if I even had the game I'd be as likely to play that as anything else... add a few raves for the map (yeah right) and I might even go get the game. And if you don't want Nazis, it's still got to be a better starting point for SP than Q3A (or Q2??? ;) ).
Similarly, so called quality standards are a weird thing with respect to Quake, it's not that hard to use a newer engine to make something that looks as good as Quake. But even if you can make a more fun map than any so far for the game you're mapping for, people would be far more likely to play a Quake level unless you pander to the wishes of the masses.
There's tons of mapping for newer games, but none of this is single player. I and others have gone through the weaknesses of the games that remain.
As to Unreal editors, I haven't used others, but UED seems like an elegant if twitchy interface, and it is prone to building errors in complex maps. UED2 comes more highly recommended (for UT, UTSP). Lots of experimentation needed to make things work due to documentation, but I'm sure that's true somewhat elsewhere too. I think there's a lot to improve on in Unreal because originally it had to be crippled to run on the PCs of the time, not that anyone else agrees with me on what those things are...
#56 posted by Scampie [216.220.241.97] on 2004/05/07 09:56:33
necros: the stuff they're releasing later allows mod creation, and people to change the entities within preexisting levels, but not create new maps.
Yes,
#57 posted by necros [69.193.41.176] on 2004/05/07 13:57:57
but there has been some mention from the devs that they are thinking of releasing plugins to export maya format as map files, then to use their editor to add items and monsters.
it was really just idle talk, but that was a month or so ago. i don't know what their stance on the issue is right now.
RtCW
#58 posted by WyldeSnake [69.133.75.190] on 2004/05/07 14:06:18
But spentron, if you made a spaceship map for RtCW, nobody would play it. You would get laughed out of the community.
You can't throw in all sorts of crazy verticals either. No efficient means of travelling other than running and jumping limits what you can do with the map. In RtCW, you can't really do much with the Z-axis as far as gameplay is concerned.
Another problem is making sure all classes and etc functions. If you want the classes to all work, you have to provide space and the capability for them all. For example, a spaceship map would not have any way for a mortar cannon to work, and would probably eliminate snipers and machineguns too, due to the confined spaces. The map would lose appeal pretty quickly.
Of course, I could be entirely wrong. But with a WWII theme, almost all maps are constrained to a WWII, or a believable setting. With Quake, we've seen it all so many times that there's no 'preset' that a quake maps fall into. There are plenty of dark military bases, void maps, outdoors romps, abandoned factories, WWII, WWI, modern-day settings. There's complete fantasy. It's all much more wide open, and because the monsters are so very generic you can use them in almost any map. If you are doing a medieval theme, fiends and ogres don't stick out very much, as well as knights and hellknights and scrags. Even Mr. Whitey works. Take it to space, and again the fiends, ogres, enforcers, hellknights, and shambly all seem right at home. WWII setting? Just use massed amounts of grunts for some mindless killing, and ogres and dogs with the rare fiend thrown in. It's all pretty flexible.
If you want to have a reasonable experience with, say, RtCW, you can't do that. You can't build a spaceship and slap Nazis in it without feeling somewhat corny about it.
And I still stick to my reason for not using UED: It's a dumb editor to learn, the instructions blow for absolute beginners. It looks pretty w3wt for experienced mappers, but getting the experience has been a very frustrating event thus far.
Hm...
#59 posted by necros [69.193.41.176] on 2004/05/07 14:42:46
i had once toyed with the idea of editing all the nazi skins and simply removing any nazi emblems. would have made them much more generic soldiers, of course, there was still the sounds...
i think it would be kind of cool to do like some hellish theme and throw in those wierd mutant monsters and the zombie monsters. that would look kind of cool. you'd need a bit of tech in there to make the electricity mutant monster fit in, but it could work...
Rtcw Mods?
#60 posted by cyBeAr [213.65.179.30] on 2004/05/07 14:55:27
Did they ever release the rtcw sp gamecode? If they had it would have been a usefull platform for interesting sp but I don't think remember them doing so.
Actually If You Center A RTCW Theme Around
#61 posted by HeadThump [65.140.55.132] on 2004/05/07 15:05:06
Von Braun and stylize the ships and the like along Nazi engineering aesthetics, you could do it without fetching the story too far given there is nothing 'realistic' about Third Reich Necromatic experimentations. It is just a matter of applying a disciplined frame work around your speculative fictions.
As far as Z limitations. That sounds weird. I haven't played or mapped for ROTW but why would there be restrictions in the z-axis whereas they don't exist in other Quake Arena engine based games, and it would be odd to cripple the functionality without any compreable advantage.
RtCW/UNreal
#62 posted by spentron [4.152.234.94] on 2004/05/07 15:57:46
But spentron, if you made a spaceship map for RtCW, nobody would play it. You would get laughed out of the community.
Yes you would, but the joke would be on who? The problem is these communities define themselves as much as what they are not as by what they are. For example the people into pure action went to Quake, so all those into environment gravitated to Unreal, yes the two games started out different but the difference deepened... when techically and game-element wise they are no more different than a Mac and a PC.
Z-axis limitations, are you saying there's no elevators (or jumppads ;) )? Some of the greatest Z-axis action in Quake maps are pure idbase with only base enemy and elevators aren't needed for upward-overlapping layouts to be an SP staple either. Big dark evil factories with lots of walkways and other verts would fit RtCW. I didn't know about the cannons but docking bays are big in SF.
Actually I got into Unreal editing because it was so *easy* to get started but then I decided it was a good thing. I chronicled some of the things I found out but saw nowhere else at the bottom of http://www.intergate.com/~spentron...
About Space Nazi And Ued...
#63 posted by Levelworm [61.173.213.132] on 2004/05/07 23:48:44
Actually I think it can be resonable to make nazis on spaceship, i.e. Some nazi scientists/armies were able to escape the down of 3rd Empire in 1945 and ran into some secret military installation to do some research...OK, after 10/20/30 years they built a space ship and you were sent to...blahblahblah
UED may seem strange to radiant/wc users, but I think you can get customed after building some levels.
We Are On To Something, Levelworm
#64 posted by HeadThump [65.140.55.191] on 2004/05/08 00:17:53
The boss monster could be an Artifical Intelligence that arose from the Enigma Project --
Spentron:
#65 posted by Shambler [82.38.194.13] on 2004/05/09 04:38:34
Bullshit. There is no restrictive style. You can make anything you want with the bits there. Games are not restrictive. People are restrictive.
AMEN to that! That should be put beneath the func_qmap logo as a reminderary motto for all to see.
Wildsnake, he was talking about an SP map not DM so all your z-axis stuff is off target.
Hmmm
#66 posted by . [68.78.216.128] on 2005/07/22 23:37:54
Having a little discussion with a friend, and showing him my WIP add-on, and then showing him Kinn's Marcher Fortress...
J'tal: you offer the addon free right?
i'm just wondering how big ist he q1 fan base? huge? because this is pretty amazing for quake one you know? if you can find a good engine group that augmented the quake 1 engine you can score big
Phait: i can't charge for the addon that's not legal.. it's not a standalone game,e ven if it was i'd have to license the q1 engine i believe
Phait: and yeah theres plenty people interested.. been a strong community for years here with better work than i do - http://www.celephais.net/board/
J'tal: q1 is open source now, but yeah i guess under something you can't charge.. celephais...hmm
Phait: func_msgboard , previously qmap
Phait: kinn's http://kinn.spawnpoint.org/maps/ma...
Phait: everyone loved
Phait: actually inspired me to do this
J'tal: thats obviously photo editted or haxed
J'tal: with ease
J'tal: it can'tbe q1
Phait: it is not
Phait: i've played it
J'tal: HAXXXXXX I SAID
Phait: just use an engine that supports skybox
Phait: thats about it
Phait: quake is more capable than people give credit for
Phait: w/ the power of the past few years you can build things bigger and more detailed
J'tal: yeah i've seen people AUGMENT the engine in amazing ways, but not map for it in such ways
Phait: well there isn't much diff from plain quake in that map, just skybox and maybe a few object limits bumped up -- still
Phait: what i'm doing is just architecture, not environmental or landmark stuff
Phait: heh people.. man.. pretentious people
J'tal: i'm still boggled...they should move to like farcry, doom3...you know...they can be fucking gods
Phait: they don't want to be gods - people work with Q1 because there is no other game like it. it even has thematic variety - at least as much variety you can get in so many hues of brown..
Phait: people work with it Q1 because it's a classic, or because the concept and gameplay are relatively simple to work with - or because it's simple, funner
Phait: the guys there work with other more recent games too.. but the quake series seems to have the most loyal following
...
J'tal: amen dman...games need to go back to games and not work
...
Phait: (quote: "It really comes down to the editor and the engine. Quake is simple. The tools are all straight foward, and the engine is simple. You have entities, textures, and brushes. That is all you really have to worry about in Quake. In the newer games you have the technology to restless with.")
J'tal:
its true...damn....man maybe thats why people take quake 1 source and modify
Bleh!
The Other Kropotkin
#67 posted by bambuz [80.221.25.15] on 2005/07/23 07:06:24
had an extension to evolutionary biology. Seems can't find him in wikipedia.
Hmm
#68 posted by Tron [203.26.206.129] on 2005/07/23 18:03:41
That conversation seems familiar, I have had it a few times with a friend who is always trying to rescue me from Quake mapping by telling me that I could make the stuff so much more realistic if I used a newer game.
I have tried explaining that it is the simplicity and limitations of the Quake engine that make it so versatile and enjoyable to work with, but he just doesn't seem to understand.
So normally I just pull out something like DarkPlaces for him to play various maps of mine in, the coloured lighting seems to make him happy. ;)
The One Thing
#69 posted by wrath [213.112.29.156] on 2005/07/24 04:42:00
I really miss in quake isn't coloured lighting, it's curved surfaces. And a higher texture resolution. So two things.
Which maybe there are newfangled engines that can do.
Wrath
#70 posted by Kinn [81.152.115.115] on 2005/07/24 04:48:48
DarkPlaces supports the Q3 bsp format, so yes, curved surfaces and purdy textures are available if you're into DP.
Kinn
#71 posted by wrath [213.112.29.156] on 2005/07/24 04:53:58
thanks for the heads up.
although this is another thing that plays against quake1. a plethora of engines. some support this, some support that. end user qa is hell. unless you just go "this map is for fitzquake, this is for dp, and fuck you very much if you don't like it." but that makes the whole affair feel all fiddle faddle foo.
alas, such is progress.
Well
#72 posted by Kinn [81.152.115.115] on 2005/07/24 05:02:44
If you can package the engine and required files etc. into the map download, then I can't see how people can complain too much (some always will though).
The Counterpart Of Celephais On The Game Unreal
#73 posted by Levelworm [67.71.108.226] on 2005/07/31 20:30:47
www.unrealsp.org
Another group of people stick to old school style...though I guess most people here heard about this site.
Hey Levelworm,
#74 posted by HeadThump [65.140.58.240] on 2005/07/31 21:18:43
longtimenosee
Hi HeadThump,
#75 posted by Levelworm [67.70.32.163] on 2005/08/02 21:04:35
It's my first year in Canada so I don't much leisure time :D
Really nice to see you guys again :P
A Rant/article On Subject
#76 posted by Jago [85.76.178.7] on 2005/08/06 16:24:19
I've just posted a short rant/article on why I am mapping for Quake (instead of mapping for newer games) as an entry to my blog: http://dnaumov.blogspot.com/2005/0...
Jago
#77 posted by . [68.74.217.74] on 2005/08/06 16:32:06
Er..
and most maps were in the 150-200 polygon/scene range. Today you can play it at 1600x1200, in full OpenGL glory with custom map projects pushing 1500 polygons/scene
Unless I'm misunderstanding something, your numbers are way low. When brushes are split (into polys, right?) in the original id maps - they were over 1,000 - that's 1996. Today people are pushing over 2500 - 5000.
Or if I'm entirely wrong, let me know.
Phait
#78 posted by Jago [85.76.178.7] on 2005/08/06 16:33:53
I was talking r_speeds.
Well
#79 posted by . [68.74.217.74] on 2005/08/06 16:35:26
I didn't see r_speeds anywhere in the article ;)
Jago
#80 posted by Kell [82.41.10.46] on 2005/08/06 16:38:05
That's the most elucidating thing I've ever seen you write. While posting it to the regulars here may be preaching to the converted, it's a good summation. n1
Oh and, two of your paragraph tags seem to be missing ( Easy to get into and Cult following )
RE: Well
#81 posted by Jago [85.76.178.7] on 2005/08/06 16:38:47
This rant was not aimed at the experienced mapper demographic, but that non-mapping people with some understanding of games and mappers for newer engines. Anyways, what are r_speeds if not the world geometry polygon count drawn by the engine?
#82 posted by wrath [213.112.29.156] on 2005/08/06 17:41:41
Working on a map alone: one of the problems with newer games (think Doom 3, Half-Life 2 and the like) is that in order to make a decent custom map, the designer has to be a level designer, texture artist, modeller, programmer jack-of-all-trades. Basically, unless you are multi-talented you are going to need lots of help from other people. With Quake you can make great stuff with just the level designer skillset (although programming experience could come handy if you are working on a project of big scale) and focus on the gameplay.
I've been thinking about this lately. Are there any q1 map collectives out there still? Working on a pack using a professional approach to it would be a good primer for aspiring amateurs, and great fun to boot. It's a very useful experience, working several mappers on the same map, trading tasks, playing to the strengths of the members, and whatnot.
(AFAIK, dapak was every man for himself, as it were.)

Post A Reply:

Name: |
Title: |
Body: |

Website copyright © 2002-2013 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.