!Request: Missilesilo skin

[Mazy]

Ive been over hl for ages now. The thing is, I dont respect something as much when its done with prefabbed static meshes made by the guys that did the game, than when its 100% made by the mapper/modeller/texture artist. Its not really anything to do with the way its done, if it looks good then it looks good, no matter what engine or game it is. Fact is that I cant really be very impressed by UT2003/04 maps where they use static meshes from the game. In theory anybody can quickly learn the basics and sit down and flap together a pretty good looking map without ever really doing anything but add some objects and fiddle the basics of mapping.

Obviously its something completely different to really make it stand out, and know how to work with the colors and lighting to make it look harmonic.

Anyway, what Im trying to say is that even though the days of old BSP mapping werent more demanding than doing it in this new stuff, then I still attach more work to making something BSPed look good, even though its more complex today where you need to model most of the level. But when you boil it down then it isnt really a disrespect of the way you do it, its the way some people do it. But the few custom UT2003/04 maps that have impressed me (and there r very few) have been made from custom statics, and in a way this seems like a big problem for the new games since they require their mappers to be modellers too.

Anyway, Im blabbering n repeating myself so ill shut up~

[von*ferret]

mazy hit it on the f'ing spot

cheers mazzzle

[Bic-B@ll]

totally agree, rendering clouds and clicking to add trees isnt exacly mapping, i have much more repsect for people who take time to make maps even though the rendering clounds na dlcikcing to add trees can look a lot bettter some times, you put so much more work into a bsp map not only to get it to look good, but to work alone and sometimes these maps on a 5 year old engine look way better than the newer engines and those people get muy props~

[FrieChamp]

Now this is turning into a debate I didn't want it to turn into, oh well, all I wanna say is, that I have been mapping for HL for years as well and I know how much effort it takes to build everything from scratch with brushes. However I moved on and learn(t) new editors for new engines and I don't like my work being judged by people who don't know how exactly it is to map for such a game and hide behind arguments like "I don't map for that game because it's too easy and everybody could make such a map within days". Things like bug fixing, tweaking etc. are sometimes the same pain in the ass like mapping for HL.

However it probably comes down to it that if you want to make really impressive maps for newer engines, then you have to build your own static meshes. The ironic aspect about it is that this isn't a problem for people like me who already map for engines like Unreal or Cryengine, it's something everyone here will be confronted with once Half-Life2 will be released, so hiding in the little VHE BSP brush world won't work anymore.

The bottom line is though, that I'm enjoying to make maps, it's fun and some guys sadly take it as too serious.

[Mazy]

Of course static mesh mapping is the future, theres no question about it. What Im saying is that there is a large amount of similar maps for these new games because most people initially use the stuff that ships with the game. Its not really a critique of the new engines, more of the people and the stuff thats being pumped out. I dont know about Farcry (havent really paid much attention to it to be honest), but afaik then UT2003/04 and Farcry are almost in the same boat where theres being made loads and loads of maps using the same static meshes because they lack modelling experience.

Im perfectly aware of the fact that it still takes time to make a map of quality in these new engines, and its probably this that will set the sea of similar looking maps apart, but my point is that Im not really seeing as much new content on these new engines as Ive seen on older stuff (and saying that Its cause its all new and stuff doesnt do it, UT2003 has been out for ages, and theres still alot of stuff using the same statics over and over, although it has gotten a bit better).

Anyway, I totally respect this new way of mapping, and when you look at it then its the most logical way to go with leveldesign.

/me pets frie

I gotta get back to work now ~

[FrieChamp]

We're riding on the same wave maz

[Duff-e]

how could you say "some people take mapping too seriously"

some people depend on it for MONEY...many examples can be found on this forum :\

[Mazy]

i make money on mapping and i dont take it seriously ;D

pwn

[kleinluka]

In response to DUFFY:

I think what he was trying to say was that it isn't justified to rate maps that don't rely on BSP brushes worse than those that do... the design aspect stays the same in both procedures and as long as the end result looks good nobody will care whether you spent 30 days making everything from brushes or 2 weeks making it with the level/terrain editor and modeling tools. In fact, the shorter the production time the better.

I think downgrading level designers just because they don't work with brush based engines is irreverent and inappropriate.

Now to put a halt to this discussion - seeing as it's not going anywhere - please refrain from heating it up more and make a constructive post in response to the original post regarding the missile silo skin.

If this thread gets out of hand I'm going to have to lock it, so show some respect for eachother (-> see Mazy).

Thanks.

[Taylor]

Mapping is going to involve more model detail opposed to brush detail, but because of the physics, shaders, materials and other new technology (lighting in doom3 is going to be a lot harder because it's dynamic, for an example) the actual brushwork you do create requires much more attention.

Ultimately mappers are going to HAVE to learn to model, yes. But it doesn't stop there; the entity system most of us are use to is on the way out too, scripting is going to be something most new engines have. I personally love script but it is something pretty hard for some people to understand, HL2 doesn't include script though, given that it probably doesn't want to alienate HL1 mappers.

I mean I used to map for HL1 as most of you know, nothing released I'm remotely proud of (it's popular in it's own little blocky niche) but I'm sure most would agree I knew what I was doing. When mentioning warcraft 3 I got lol'ed at because people assume it's just terrain generation, it's not until you scratch the surface and see things like the 10,000 lines of script, completely new unit and entity sets that you realise that it's a pretty advanced versitle editor - but on the surface people just assume "height map -> convert = map" (it doesn't even support height maps, but that's beside the point). I got the terrain done in 2 days, spending 2 weeks in the trigger editor IS 2 weeks of level design, in fact I much prefer injecting maps with new diverse gameplay via. triggers than spendings 2 hours arranging { brushes into a tree.

The newer engines operate much in the same way, the main visual aspect is achieved much easier; but to create something unique/advanced you're going to have to dabble in materials, shaders, modelling and scripting. And you know what? This is a good thing as it allows newer mappers to create what they want easier, while giving the advanced mappers more stuff to play with.

(screenshot is actually the front end to the script, much easier for looking at that 100 lines of text, mind)

[Duff-e]

the fact that you even responded to my retarded response makes me feel special

[FrieChamp]

Yes, mapping is much more than the obvious things you see on the pictures.

[Duff-e]

i dunno....i think things can be as complex as you would like to make them

it all depends on the tools made for people to interface editing with. im sure something like hammer could have been made where it was just as labor intensive and tedious as making a map in notepad, but it just so happens its not. sort of like the wc3 thing you're talking about.....im sure with enough incentive and refinement, someone could have easily made a pretty button to do what 30 lines of manually typed script can do.

^^ thats a pretty obvious conclusion...but anything thats a pain in the ass to do and has a large fan base usually is turned into a workable "my grandmother could be a level designer" interface

[zaphod]

being a good mapper has nothing to do with how easy to use the editor is.

[Taylor]

it all depends on the tools made for people to interface editing with. im sure something like hammer could have been made where it was just as labor intensive and tedious as making a map in notepad, but it just so happens its not

You can sketch down a decent map layout in about 10 minutes in any editor once you know the fundimental concepts of it, then it can take a while to do the entity work depending on what you're working on, it's only graphical prowess you are refering to, so you can hold yourself as better than other mappers when you've creating a nice looking tree by hand, while missing the point these are the bells and whistles that go on top of the design you've created.

im sure with enough incentive and refinement, someone could have easily made a pretty button to do what 30 lines of manually typed script can do.

What? Look at the screenshot. That's one trigger (although the frontend for it) and there are several more down the side; I have an array of 10 spawn points, it checks if the spawn point is alive, if so it takes out 2 units from an array of units (depending on level) and spawns them (3 melee, 2 ranged), then it has a 1 in 5 chance of spawning a 'rare' unit and a 1 in 5 chance of making a random unit have 4 new abilties, higher scale and colour tint. I also have a heap of other triggers for the introduction cinematic, the undead spawning (more complex) custom abilities (player casts a spell, it stops it and the effect is done by trigger work). Each unit is given a path to follow, there is 5 'corridors' each with 4 checkpoints to make the units run down in a straight pth without crossing over or stopping. Explain exactly how someone is going to put all this into a command button? The frontend IS as simple as Blizzard could've made it.