Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Soldat Du Christ

CSGO Community commentary from an outsider perspective

Recommended Posts

On 7/18/2020 at 3:13 PM, fewseb said:

You know the grand majority of competitive pool maps were maps were made by hobbyists in the 90s right? Nobody back then knew what constituted a good map, they just made things they found fun with the very limited level editor they had for goldsrc. Nobody but the community chose what maps would still be popular today. Dave Johnson didnt sit down and think about 25 layers of level design theory when he made dust2, he just threw shit at a wall and found things he liked. He didnt set out to make the definitive CS map layout, he stumbled upon it.

Now 20 years later you cant really change the basic foundation of a map very much before it becomes something new entirely. Even though it is easier now to make maps at non 90 degree angles, they cant just go back and adjust old maps to be less square. Nobody here chose what maps would be in the tournment pool, no one here likes how stagnant csgo maps have become. We have to cater to a community who doesnt like new things, You can ask anyone here and they probably at some point had some new, revolutionary design that played well and would be a total refresher to the map pool if added, what happens? Players see a map they dont understand from the first 5 seconds in game, then quit and downvote on the workshop.

About the only game changing map to ever make it into the game was Insertion. Want to know what happened when players who didnt like new things played insertion? They left negative reviews for csgo and then went to the map creators profile and left him angry messages. You can look at Insertions workshop page and see in the months when it was in game people leaving essay long rants about why it sucks and massive dislike spam.

Its not our fault that the only new maps the csgo community want are old ones theyve already played. Mappers have tried their best to make less blocky and more out-there layout ideas, but the more you deviate from the dust2/mirage layout, the less an average player will like the map. And when theres a total 8 slots max a year for new maps to get in and half the time those slots will be filled with old maps from previous operations, you can see why mappers have just stuck to the standard layout because its their best chances of getting in the game.

 

To some it up, no one here wants to keep remaking dust2, they just have to in order to get players to play their map.

Bravo! I completely agree, that is the tragedy of any competitive game with a map maker editor, you could pretty much say the same thing about halo, the players just want lockout/ gaurdian/ midship remix's all day. I'm prepared for the csgo audience to not like my map, or at most they find it interesting and play it casually even though I designed it with the upmost care for competitive play. 

 

I'm sure that there have been some ambitious directions taken with level designs for CSGO and it wasn't right of me to make fun of the repetitive maps we see coming and going, because like you said, they are just giving the players what they want.

 

I think if the map contests here where tested more thoroughly, where the judges and players are forced to give more ambitious maps a chance to figure out, there would be a higher chance that a map such as mine (for example) could place highly in the contest and maybe we would see more of a shift in new directions. This was my goal when i first started the map way back at the beginning of the contest, to make a unique map and make it balanced enough to be taken seriously and hopefully get everyone to follow through after me.  

 

At this point i pursue primarily for my own closure and to expand my experience, but i also hope the map could serve as the ultimate example of a unique and complex map done right for future generations. That depends on how balanced I can make it. I guess we will have to see! *shrug*

On 7/18/2020 at 6:17 PM, Kokopelli said:

quBC4JB.jpg

Let's say you have five CTs in the positions above.

c4pTYaQ.jpg

As I'm approaching from the tunnel I'm hugging the right wall so I can engage a player playing the back of the site without being exposed to any other angles.

NtfAjIV.jpg

When I get here, I can get a narrow peak at a player playing behind the stack on site.

Elutijd.jpg

As I continue forward, I begin hugging the left side of the tunnel as I sweep right to clear each angle on site one by one.

mPDgNOQ.jpg

Before stepping outside the tunnel, I look up to check for a CT playing on top of this stack.

OUUyRPi.jpg

While I'm checking that stack I'm still inside the tunnel and not exposed to the CT playing the corner on the left.

Gq7PyLn.jpg

Then I check that corner.

gNm65QL.jpg

Next, I press up against the stack so I can again check for a player playing the stack on the bombsite.

b8tkANg.jpg

After that I check car.

jUpjrzu.jpg

Then deep in the cubby.

5M6rWkG.jpg

And finally directly behind the 

You can't deduct wether or not players are in those further back positions unless they choose to reveal themselves and challenge you. Even if you progress in the most optimal way possible as you have suggested, you have no idea if there are enemies hiding behind those pieces of cover, they will peak out at their own discretion, not conveniently when you choose to look at them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Soldat Du Christ said:

make it balanced enough to be taken seriously

Balance isn't the most important thing when making a map. A map is defined by its encounter design and the way areas build up those encounters, see my previous post for a fairly thorough explanation of what I mean.

This is why some maps may appear repetitive, mappers are making new and original encounters but sticking to the roots with 'set up' areas. Can you really blame them? Making a set up area too complicated overwhelms players and disrupts flow. Very good maps design their encounter areas as potential set up areas, simplifying the design and adding depth to the gameplay.

Dust 2, a classic de_ map can be broken down into three categories of areas:
Examples of encounter areas that can potentially serve as setup are: B tunnels, Mid, CT spawn, catwalk, and farside A long.
Examples of pure setup areas are: T spawn,  outside B tunnels, and the area outside long doors and top mid.
Examples of pure encounter areas(also setup areas when on the defending side): Bombsite A and B

Edited by DMU222

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DMU222 said:

Balance isn't the most important thing when making a map. A map is defined by its encounter design and the way areas build up those encounters, see my previous post for a fairly thorough explanation of what I mean.

This is why some maps may appear repetitive, mappers are making new and original encounters but sticking to the roots with 'set up' areas. Can you really blame them? Making a set up area too complicated overwhelms players and disrupts flow. Very good maps design their encounter areas as potential set up areas, simplifying the design and adding depth to the gameplay.

Dust 2, a classic de_ map can be broken down into three categories of areas:
Examples of encounter areas that can potentially serve as setup are: B tunnels, Mid, CT spawn, catwalk, and farside A long.
Examples of pure setup areas are: T spawn,  outside B tunnels, and the area outside long doors and top mid.
Examples of pure encounter areas(also setup areas when on the defending side): Bombsite A and B

When it comes to competitive play, maps are only as deep as they are balanced, which makes both equally important. In my case i want to build a very unique map which welcomes complexity and has a learning curve, which implies it is harder to balance, much more so than a simple map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Soldat Du Christ said:

When it comes to competitive play, maps are only as deep as they are balanced, which makes both equally important. In my case i want to build a very unique map which welcomes complexity and has a learning curve, which implies it is harder to balance, much more so than a simple map.

What do you mean with the highlighted bit?

Because over time there has been much more relaxation regarding the balance, a map to be good and entertaining doesn't need to be as close to a clean 50-50 split. I argued this months ago, posting stats of the maps most played in the tournaments and their ratios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Soldat Du Christ said:

In my case i want to build a very unique map which welcomes complexity and has a learning curve, which implies it is harder to balance, much more so than a simple map.

And how exactly you want to balance a map that has learning curve and welcomes complexity? You gonna end up with not fun map. What you dont seem to realise is that a csgo community vary a lot in terms of player skill. It's all great to have some complex tactics that gives your team an advantage until a new and unskilled player comes and gets rekt by your team and loose interest in playing your map because he wasn't aware of that. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, blackdog said:

What do you mean with the highlighted bit?

Because over time there has been much more relaxation regarding the balance, a map to be good and entertaining doesn't need to be as close to a clean 50-50 split. I argued this months ago, posting stats of the maps most played in the tournaments and their ratios.

If you add a position in your map that is designed to give players a unique option, but fail to make earning that position worth while, then the position and all the depth it has to offer might as well not exist because it is too risky vs the reward you can get out of it. Balancing the travel time to certain positions, lines of sight that you can use while your there, how vulnerable the position is from other areas around the map, etc, all factor into whether or mot a position is viable. The more positions you have that are balenced, the more depth that is added to your map, from the micro to the macro. 

On your note about "entertainment" wether or players enjoy a map or not can be based on their fleeting emotions, which could continue to fluctuate as they begin to understand a map more. Some people like to fight against all odds because it feeds into their ego, they find that fun. Some just want to accurately test their mechanical skills on simple maps where map depth takes a back seat. Some people thirst for more than the base mechanics and the traditional depth maps have had to offer and want more elaborate playspaces. While peoples idea of fun will change from person to person, what makes a map balanced and have depth are objectively measurable qualities.

In the case of CSGO where teams switch between offense and defense like @Vilham  said, you don't even have to have both sides perfectly balanced because as long as long as both teams have a chance it is fair game. But having individual positions be worthless is a sad missed opportunity caused by poor balence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Vilham said:

That is true if your gamemode switches teams at half time.

In something like traditional domination or capture the flag where there is no half time team switch being balanced 50-50 is generally important.

That’s a good point, just to be clear I was limiting my comment to CS ;) 

Regarding the fun @Soldat Du Christ that is true for sure, I used to hate Train, when I learned how to play it has been one of the maps I play the most and I perma-ban from my selection D2 and Mirage.

With the additional explanation I now understand what you mean regarding the balancing… I would dare saying that is one of those: “it goes without saying” moments. I would think that’s one of if not the most fundamental principle of a multiplayer map (unless you are designing for an asymmetrical game/mode).

Edited by blackdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...