DEMOZ2A.BSP

[ Back - Factory Main ]

 

 Author: ZOo [Andrew Aksyonov]

Release Date: May 21st 1998

Reviewed by: grimm [502]

Review Date: July 4th 1998

FTP: DEMOZ2A.ZIP (974k)

take a look at the docs DEMOZ2A.TXT


Architectural Originality
Interior Architectural detail
Proper use of textures
Light & Ambience
5/5
5/5
5/5
5/5
Speed & Efficiency
Documentation (.txt)
4/5
2/5
Respawn position & construction
Item quantity and positions
Gameflow & Class Specifics
My own 2 cents
3/5
4/5
4/5
4/5

TOTAL: 41/50 Very Good.

Notes: I was really caught by surprise by this map. I have noticed lately that many map makers have been really coming up with some original and really amazing architectural designs. This map is no exception, the design is not only highly original while staying functional, and you have to admit it looks really snazzy too.

The texture, lighting and ambience work in this map is really excellent. I don't know if this author has released any other maps before this one, but this is really high quality construction. It definitely has a quake2 feel to it and a great deal of attention has been paid to detail. But not merely eye candy, there are tons of interesting places to perch yourself. Some harder to reach but really interesting spots that could definitely be a great deal of fun in a match.

I have had a great deal of comments from people, concerning my comments about gameplay in other reviews. Some people were glad that I pointed out areas or details I thought might be a problem, while others literally flamed me for commenting on gameplay when I haven't even had the chance to try the map on a server yet.

I think I've done my best to point out details that were obviously going to annoy players, like myself on the first impression. I ain't psychic, I can't know what it will play like on a server before trying it. But I can point out, in my gameplay notes, things that just seem like they can affect gameplay. With that in mind, let's look at the map in question.

Gameplay wise, I think this map could be a great deal of fun, it definitely has a great deal of winning elements. It may seem big at first, but it is definitely about the same size as two forts, so nothing really out of the ordinary there. Respawn positions and some scattered backpacks could lend a hand to slower classes. The respawn design of the respawns without doors could definitely cause a problem. Where most authors have been working hard to create respawns that could discourage llamas, this author has opted for the high tech design over utility. Although an invisible GLASS door above and below the bar could definitely keep the nice effect while preventing respawn spam fests.

I had a little problem at first, knowing where the heck I was going, but that goes away with time, but I think the author could have added a few textures here and there, or markers, to help figure out where the heck we are, or are going. If you get turned around in a firefight, you will have a hard time figuring out where to run to. It may seem like a small detail, but I think it's important and hardly any effort is required on the part of the map maker.

The two low scores are simple, the respawn construction is just not up to par with other maps I've reviewed. There is also nothing to stop telefragging. The other low score is simply due to the less than normal documentation. I mean you can argue about what more is needed, but it wouldn't be fair to score any higher, in comparison to the effort others have put to attain a higher score in that field.

So what do I think of this map? I think it is not only professionaly crafted, but it's built with style and should make a monster of a match map.

-grimm [502]

 

Screen Shots:

Image 1: The Capture Point in the Blue Base Main Room
Image 2: The Blue Flag, behind the slow gate
Image 3: The Courtyard with Tower & Tunnel
Image 4: The Train Tunnel Connecting courtyards
Image 5: A view from the tower at night.

This site and it's content is copyright F.C.O. enr. 1998.
All original art and graphics are watermarked for authentication purposes. The content submitted by contributors is copyright by the respectful owner.