Dubrovnik_fp released

(.Chris.) #21

well done, havent played with others yet but went around on my own and its nice map, like the whole key card and generator thing very nice, spotted few overlapping textures tho you prolly sorted them allready, if not ill post pics of you want.

also when i blew up the gate to church, in limbo they was a red cross next to that objective that means failed doesnt it? shouldnt it be a tick for completed? and on command map nothing showing up, this was in etmain tho may work in etpro not sure. apart from that all good :clap:

(]UBC[ McNite) #22

@ blushing_bride:

1.) mmmm i think i failed there already :smiley:
2.) y so?
3.) oh yea BABY sure I did that
4.) about 3 mins if they are lucky or tactically good

Would it be possible to get your opinion on my map when there s the next playable version?

(sorry @ Ifurita for misusing your thread)

(Ifurita) #23

@ B_B

  1. More detail will be added in the next round. There are still tons of rooms that are unfurnished and lonely
  2. No light compile on this map means that it is painfully bright
  3. It is more RTCWish - no command post, a few key activities for engies, but it certainly is not a ‘build the world’ map
  4. You can win in under a minute on this map, but that means that you ran two attack teams that just steamrolled the other side
(blushing_bride) #24

in my opinion none of my points makes a good ET map. As far as i can tell most clan players came to ET from RTCW. Thats why they are trying to make ET as similar to RTCW as possible and thats why they want maps more like in RTCW. I believe in RTCW you could adjust your settings to make the maps full bright (vertex lighting or something) and thats why they get so excited when they see a map that has no lighting or very basic and bland lighting.

Ifurita this map is looking great so far. if you leave it as it is i suspect it will get a better reception amongst clans then if you work it upto the usual high standard.

(Muffin Man) #25

This goes for almost any game though there are exceptions.

Every LAN party I go to ( Being on a Game Development course means daily LAN Games :wink: ) only the best maps are played ( when playing ET ), they have to have good gameplay and have to look good, if the map looks like rubbish players get bored really fast. Which explains why we mainly only play the original campaign maps. Detail is key to immersion, without immersion players will not get involved as much as if they “feel like they are there”. Scientificly, if they aren’t immersed their heartrate will not go up and they will not start producing the various chemicals the body creates while “hunting”, they same chemicals that make you happy, angry sad etc. These chemicals are the reason we play games, if a player doesn’t produce these while playing your map, they will not make an effort to play it as ,much as if they are immersed easily.

Damn, I can babble cant I ? I’ll stop now I have more buildings to go texture. :slight_smile:

(Ifurita) #26

Actually, I disagree, with the exception about the point about lighting.

Detail has it’s place, but there has to be a good reason for it, whether it be immersion, cover, eye candy etc. Some people off the deep end one way, and totally detail every little thing, and never release the map. Others offer such stripped down maps, they are just boring to play. I think you need to keep in mind who your target audience is and offer the appropriate level of detail.

I personally like faster maps, I just find them more exciting. It would be nice to change up the attacking side every now and then so that when included in campaigns, the allies aren’t winning every map simply because they’re geared towards offense. Also, you’ll appreciate shorter maps once you’ve struggled thru a 4-hour match.

Lastly, I think it is totally possible to offer tight maps which offer each class something to do – at the right strategic moment. In Dubrovnik, teams have to make a choice between firepower (engy) or speed (covert) in order to get past the church doors. Axis engies are critical to keep thee church doors built and they have a few spots to mine. As for being more RTCW-ish, the map is just too small for a CP and I don’t like escort missions. There are constructibles, but they exist at key spots.

(]UBC[ McNite) #27

Muffin, I think your teachers need to read less about crude basics of psychology and play more on servers like efterlyst, bio and Telenet (for comp gaming) and on AiA or IPD for large publics.
The detail won’t keep you immersed for long in a map. What you really need is a well planned (or luckily acchieved) VERY balanced gamelayout that allows both fast wins and complete holds (but only for max 20 mins else it gets BORING).

In addition you need a setting (buildings, terrain etc.) that might just be real and offers a good variety in combat situations, i.e. a good mix of long-/mid-range combat and close quarter combat. So you need both open areas and very closed ones with tight buildings, narrow doorways and stuff. This offers you a change of fighting-styles and everybody playing the map has areas in which he feels “at home”.

These are the ingredients that make a map interesting imo: balanced gamelayout, speed (no getting stuck with stupid vehicles), variety of combat situations.
Its not the detail, i d say that s purely theoretical. You don’t have ppl running around in maps looking at all the little details for hours (they tend to get kicked anyway :smiley: )
Competitive gamers use picmic 2-3 which blurrs all your detail, and the average public gamer will only play the game for a long time when it offers fun = good fighting that doesn’t get boring.
The only real use of detail is to catch the first time players attention to keep him long enough in the game/the map to start liking the gameplay. Detail can NEVER make up bad gamelayout/mapdesign.

(Ifurita) #28

McNite is a stupid head :wink:

Then again, very few mappers go total box map with no detail. I like to to think that I operate on a LOD model geared towards comp gamers. For comp gamers, or even during intense pub games, the map textures, details, are just background. When you’re focusing on an intense firefight, a low level of detail appears nearly the same as an extremely high level of detail … to a certain level.

I agree with McNite in that gameplay has to come first, but that doesn’t mean that you have to sacrifice very nice, immersive detail - Cathedral is pretty amazing that it maintains high FPS despite all of the arches and other lighting effects.

(FireFly) #29

Well, I started working on this map with Ifurita and some others some time ago and I created the church-area, where the gold is (main obj).

I deliberately did not add any details or eye-candy to my piece of the map. Simply because I knew that the first public version of the map would be a “first playable” version: meaning that we would first check out and solve any gameplay issues or chokepoints…

After that we would add detail ( if r_speeds is kind to us) and some eye-candy…

Ifurita this map is looking great so far. if you leave it as it is i suspect it will get a better reception amongst clans then if you work it upto the usual high standard.

(argh- punch in the face-) Even if this map is aimed at comp/clans play: it does not mean that it will be a rtcw map nor will it mean that we will try to get r_speeds as low as possible by NOT adding any detail…

(Muffin Man) #30

Thank you ]UBC[ McNite, I always welcome more input to game design. Alot of the areas your talking about are extremely relivant I had neglected to go onto those as I was focusing on in game detail. Had my point been about bad layout or another such relivant topic as your points had produced I would’ve brought up similar points.

This map from my observations hadn’t failed in any of these, not with getting into a long drawn out process of inspection and test game play. I haven’t played on the map and looking at a map and actually playing on it can bring a broad contrast between expectations and actual results.

The only comments I felt I should make were of graphical relivance as that’s all I could say I had seen and understood to a decent level.

I’m a perfectionist when it comes to modeling and detail so my critizism is stronger based on my own level of comfort when it comes to how immersive things are. This map has alot of potental and I would love to see a really graphical / detailed version. Wether it be a second release after the fact or not, I would enjoy it. :slight_smile:

(blushing_bride) #31

the hardest part is getting the map accepted. most judgments about custom maps seem to be made in the first ten seconds. You would think therefore that sexy maps would stand a better chance then ugly ones. absurd as it sounds i have got the impression recently that clan players will be more receptive to ugly maps. you only need to read the positive reception that Special Delivery is getting and compare it to the kind of comments ive seen regarding cathedral, tc_venice_rc2, rommel_b2, (maps made by mappers) etc to see what i mean.

(Ifurita) #32

I think that you have to seperate out some details (detail, lighting, etc) from actual game play. Delivery is getting a good reception, because the gameplay is very solid. He’s delivering what his target audience wants/needs. It bugs me from a mapper standpoint because I know visually the map could be awesome with some lighting etc. I like having a few shadows to hide in, but that doesn’t necessarily change the gameplay. Given the tweaks that some comp players use on existing, lightmapped maps, you’d wonder whether or not your lighting is even seen. If it can’t be seen, why bother adding it? Just playing devil’s advocate

(S.S.Heirpie) #33

Very nice map, and for once the covert op is useful for blowing the door…to get the gold!! very nice!!! you see covert ops in my fav!!

(blushing_bride) #34

maps are judged in the first ten minutes, no one knows if a map has good game play until its been properly played for a few months. why does one map get given a chance and not another. that’s the mystery to me

(Mean Mr. Mustard) #35

I’ll be cynical here (some of you may ask - isn’t he always cynical??)…but comp players are all gung-ho for new maps. I saw it with cathedral and rommel. Even after they were released, comp players were still embracing them. Then they get played a few times…when the comp players realized that their old strats did not work (“oops - we need to develop new strats” - horror!), they then start saying ‘map unsuitable for comp play’ – but two weeks before it was suitable. Almost like it’s easier to reject a map then develop suitable strats…

Then they latch onto a new map – “oh, look at that map. It looks like strat x might work on that - awesome map, greatest comp map yet…” Then they will play it, realize new strats will have to be devised, then reject the map. I’m quite certain this will be the fate of Dubrovnik and Special Delivery…

(KingJackaL) #36

Released a bit too late for our league season ATM, but I’ll keep my eyes on it, have a run around submit any bugs etc.

A few of the guys here noticed the overly ‘clean’ feel of the map. But yeah, the details like that do tend to get overlooked a lot :|. Still, VERY nice looking map - I know I appreciate the excellent texture work and lighting :).

(Vitriol) #37

i dont think you guys should clip off the roof on rommel. a team could set up a nasty defense using it, or a nasty offense. i whole -heartedly agree with you Mr. Mustard. I try to stay pretty involved in competition (though I’m just coming off semi-retirement now), and one of the things i liked best was coming up with new strategies. i remember a map that was played in RtCW a few seasons back (had a crashed plane in it, urban setting, dont remember the name) that made for some great scrims and matches. the thing that was cool about it was that i had seen a full-on R1 hold on base a million times, but i’d never seen a panzer sneaking around under the wing of a plane or a sniper hitting people through a 2 story high wall of barb wire.

(ChumChum) #38

Mapping for comp reminds me of this quote I have from i believe locki:

“Game development is like the game paper, scissors and stone; if you make stone beat paper, the stone players are happy, but the paper players are not. Any change you make can unbalance the game, but none of the players (stone, paper or scissors) want to play with what they have and all want upgrades.”

(au.Hiroshima>) #39

well I for one like a fair bit of detail even in matches and I certainly appreciate good lighting effects, however I agree that it’s not worth going overboard if it will cause much delay when comps desperately need good customs.

This is shaping up to be a very nice map, maybe after the match version is done you could tart it up a bit for pub play and up the time limit? I know you’ve said you dislike escorts but the truck could be used to take gold to the boat, which would also make a nice allied victory animation if it started up and sped off the screen. (for pub version of course). just thoughts, not a request.

(Ifurita) #40

@ heirpie - the door was made to be satchelable to force teams to make the tactical tradeoff between firepower (engy) and a covert (speed). Plus, the covert is very useful for providing cover as you cross the square and there are some nice rooftop sniping spots