Posts by FMPONE

  • Fallout 76

    Quote from [HP]

    21 minutes ago, [HP] said: Oh boy... been a while I've seen people gang banging on a game like this, seems like there's a limit, even for Bethesda.

    Felt weird about this since it's announcement at e3, it just feels like it lacks soul. And it doesn't seem like the execution can save it either, as it's the usual clunky shooter as previous Bethesda fallouts and just as buggy too.

    Guess this is probably the last nail on the Fallout coffin, sad as I really loved F3. F4 was ok. This... i don't even know what to make of it. Provably a last attempt to put another fallout game out before they move on to their new space game/ip.

    This seems a bit premature. I can’t picture them walking away from an IP as big as Fallout.

    Its worth pointing out though that they’ve now struck out on both Wolfenstein AND Fallout sequels. What’s next, fucking up an Elder Scrolls? That would be devastating. Definitely something seems a bit off with their quality control lately...

  • What I'm Working On

    Thanks for pointing these out! Bouncing smoothly off this wall isn’t ideal IMO because sometimes when you peek an angle you want to tuck into it rather than glide off smoothly. Not ideal for every situation but I think it’s better to tuck here than to slide off unintentionally into mid

  • Black Mesa Source

    Quote from JeanPaul

    1 hour ago, JeanPaul said: We posted our xen trailer this morning if you havent seen it yet :D


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
    https://steamcommunity.com/games/362890/a…111426405732058

    Woot!

    It looks so great, can’t wait to play it. New Half-Life content!!

  • Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

    Quote from Squad

    22 minutes ago, Squad said: In this case and for this contest, I think it'd be worthwile to formulate a defintion for "playtesting".

    At the moment, "playtesting" can be anything from checking timings in a first greybox iteration by yourself to a full 5 vs 5 competitive match and everything in between.

    Exactly. It's so vague as to be meaningless. There might be some gripes here and there about the rules as they stood last time, but they seemed largely fine at the time and also in hindsight.

  • Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

    A "can't have been playtested" addition to the greybox rule might be viable. It could result in a situation where we do have to disqualify people based on the definition of "playtesting". Another layer of ambiguity to the rules that might not be welcome.

    Even if we have to accept some imperfections, keeping the rules from the last contest certainly seems like the most simple (and democratically approved) approach at this time.

  • Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

    Quote from Radu

    15 minutes ago, Radu said: Since the mapping community is fairly small, part of that enforcement could come from other contestants. We've all seen at some point what most of us have been working on, even if it was just a screenshot sent over chat. But I think that's something to really consider. Even a few days - maybe a week, is a huge advantage. Sometimes a day can make the difference and a lot of people were working until the very last minute in the last two contests.

    So, three thoughts on this, because as a level designer myself I really appreciate the discussion and the passion that goes into it.

    1. We want to give you more than enough time when we hold contests. In this case the voting confirms that. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 6-9 months? It should be doable and reasonable. Imagine, for example, if Valve tasked you with creating a level in this timeframe. Seems doable to create a shippable product — so the competition is on to see who can do so the best.

    2. A greybox is an idea. But we won’t be judging ideas. We will be judging products, if our contest is anything like our last. This is about creating high quality products, a greybox is the most theoretical, first step out of about a billion in creating a great level. Does it have an impact? Sure. But so does talent, and we can’t level the playing field of ideas any easier than the playing field of talent.

    3. We may consider measures such as a loose theme to mitigate some of the valid arguments raised on this topic. It’s not a perfect fix, but it could be a constructive step.

    Some things to consider! Broadly speaking, this is one of those rules that seemed fine in the last go-round, where changing it seems like a bit of a pointless gamble.

  • Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

    Quote from grapen

    11 minutes ago, grapen said: Well, I sure don’t have a graybox, and I don’t need to tell anyone here that making one can take a long time unless you skip playtesting entirely. In a contest that spans six months that’s a huge advantage. I would much rather see fresh maps only, and if someone cheats then that’s on their conscience.

    So you would advocate for ditching the greybox rule entirely and requiring entirely new .vmfs of work? The only question is how to tell, the burden comes on us to enforce that, and it seems like it could be a tough one. We can certainly consider that, however. It all boils down to enforcement. You say "if people cheat that's on them", but actually it's on us if we're holding a contest. Part of building good rules is not making them so unenforceable and bordering on idea policing.

  • Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

    Quote from grapen

    3 minutes ago, grapen said: No the previous ruling was very ambiguous, see my reply to Ornatebaboon uo there ^. Some entries had been in production for more than six months last time.

    Quote from OrnateBaboon

    11 hours ago, OrnateBaboon said:

    • Maps already under construction. Unless I am mistaken, the last contest drew the line at maps that were anything more than a dev textured block out. In other words, if you added any models or textures to the map, you could not enter. The inherent problem here is that by including this kind of rule as a staple of any and all future contests, it can encourage a culture of secrecy. Mappers will hold back their arted work from the forum, through fear of violating the rules. Knowing if all maps have begun from when the contest is announced is also impossible.

    Clearly our intention with that rule is to draw a reasonable line in the sand where people don't have a massive advantage building a fully-fleshed map that they can then immediately submit to the contest. Just about everyone has a greybox sitting around, the idea that we will be able to tell who was working on one etc. the problem with that, simply not a feasible rule to have. We did what was reasonably enforceable. Make sense?

  • Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

    Quote from grapen

    1 minute ago, grapen said: Disappointed to hear that. Who’s doing the voting? Because seems to me like a majority of people in this thread wants to see fresh maps, for the spirit of competition. Makes me think the agenda here is something different entirely.

    Sorry but wasn't that exactly our rule set last time around? Only original maps, no remakes, no prior work? Because that's what's currently polling ahead. Just want to be clear here...

  • Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

    Hey all,

    Thank you for this feedback. I've removed the swear word from the title because this feedback is actually great and really useful.

    So the first measure that @Thrik has approved of, us changing the word "Staff" from all the site stuff. If we do future contests, I'd like to restrict participation to judges only, not to people who are just longstanding members of our community. As for the other stuff touched on in this thread, currently the votes align with the rules we already had in place last year.


    Quote from text_fish

    On 11/9/2018 at 2:37 PM, text_fish said: It's great that you're on board with the idea in theory, but I think this is one of those occasions where Valve will be lead by the community. Until they see an influx of interest in HR (which is a real possibility if 5-10 good quality community maps emerge) they're unlikely to look twice at it.

    This is a smart point.

  • Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

    Quote from text_fish

    8 hours ago, text_fish said: Agreed. I would love it if Mapcore ran a hostage rescue map comp to try and (re)raise the profile of the game mode.

    This is something I would want to see after our next CS:GO contest. It would be fun to do in conjunction with some real update from CS:GO such as a re-evaluation of the money system when in CS game-mode.

  • Hypothetical-Contest Rules Voting

    Quote from ElectroSheep

    1 hour ago, ElectroSheep said: If you really want a cool contest, but it's just my opinion, propose something else than just doing the next competitive shit. I remember the day on 1.6 when we had tons of fun and interesting maps and when the hostage gamemode was cool (breaking into a house from every corner was nice) + we also have assassination and escape maps. Aww man...

    I'm really frustrated at the way Valve has treated hostage maps. It might some kind of political nervousness, but as a gamemode it's the _only_ alternative to bomb defusal, and Valve has done very little to indicate they even care about alternatives to bomb defusal. I don't think we've seen a major update on that gamemode in maybe 4 years. They should do more there.