Realistic WW2 Battles

(comm) #1

I like how enemy territory has’nt continued the path of rtcw, and its cartoony/comic book tale.

I was wondering if developers could make maps more realistic, market garden is the best map ever, just because I have seen the movie based on the battle, and read up and reaseached lots about it, it just gives me goosebumps looking about it.

I just like the realistic parts of et, the new weapons etc. Just so developers know that alot of people love it, and want more maps based on realistic events.

Thank You splahs damage for making this amazing game, and thank you for any feature development towards it, and the developers making new maps, etc.

Thank you.

(demoneye) #2

I’m currently researching and have started the build of a scale model of Castle Colditz… There will have to be a little “artistic licence” to allow for gameplay, but the basic scale, size and colour will be as the original.

DeMoNeye

(sock) #3

Realistic games can be fun but “realism” must always take second place to “fun gameplay” as at the end of the day this is why you are playing games in the first place? … right?

The only problem with realism is that it involves alot of research and attention to detail while making maps. Realistic mapping is difficult but with photo sourcing and constructive support from others it can be done.

Sock
:moo:

(demoneye) #4

You’re telling me :angry:

I’m sat here looking at about 12 reference books, several blue prints and a constantly buzzing Photoshop :slight_smile:

As Sock says - gameplay is the goal, but I suppose I like the challenge that comes with it too… I just wish the game engine was a little kinder then providing me with a 9 units = 1 foot conversion :banghead:

DeMoNeye

(skinner) #5

yea the ‘mystical’ quake units are really annoying :disgust:

Kawasaki ZR750H

(sock) #6

When I was using floor plans for creating maps I took the original floor plan, saved to a TGA image and scaled it up till it “felt” right in the editor. Using info_player_start models helped with gauging the scale of buildings and areas, but some elements of “realism” do cause problems:

  • Small corridor/room rooms do not work well on public servers because they are maze like and confusing. In WW2 soldiers were briefed on what they where suppose to do for objectives. Try getting anyone to read a manual on a game! :wink:

  • Realistic door frames usually only fit 1 player. Some people find it funny to stand in doorways and block rooms/corridors. Alot of the critical doorways in ET had to be changed to resolve this problem.

  • Complex realistic objectives are impossible to get right on public servers. Yes players eventually get the idea but it takes alot of headless chicken matches to get there. The simplier and more striaghtforward the objectives the easier it is for players to get the hang of them.

This does not mean “realism” is bad but it means that Level Designers have to compromise some things for gameplay. To me personally RTCW/ET is about feeling “realistic” without being anal “realistic”.

Sock
:moo:

(wudan) #7

I find building from photosources looks 10x more true-to-context than anything I can make up.

(comm) #8

When I was using floor plans for creating maps I took the original floor plan, saved to a TGA image and scaled it up till it “felt” right in the editor. Using info_player_start models helped with gauging the scale of buildings and areas, but some elements of “realism” do cause problems:

  • Small corridor/room rooms do not work well on public servers because they are maze like and confusing. In WW2 soldiers were briefed on what they where suppose to do for objectives. Try getting anyone to read a manual on a game! :wink:

  • Realistic door frames usually only fit 1 player. Some people find it funny to stand in doorways and block rooms/corridors. Alot of the critical doorways in ET had to be changed to resolve this problem.

  • Complex realistic objectives are impossible to get right on public servers. Yes players eventually get the idea but it takes alot of headless chicken matches to get there. The simplier and more striaghtforward the objectives the easier it is for players to get the hang of them.

This does not mean “realism” is bad but it means that Level Designers have to compromise some things for gameplay. To me personally RTCW/ET is about feeling “realistic” without being anal “realistic”.

Sock
:moo:[/quote]

All in all, if you make good maps that are hard, its more fun, thats why you need a bigger variety.

The harder maps are always good for matches, were everyone can corodinate attacks etc.

Have you ever played WW2Online, the graphics are stick figure like, the expirence is real as it can be, I mean you drive to the battle, get out, your sometimes killed right away. I like et the way it is now, im sure there are things that can be changed and should, but the map I found in rtcw were crap, too cartoony, and comic book like. If you ever seen the movie “Kelly’s Hero’s” its totally like gold rush, well not totally but its the same idea. The minute I saw it, I was like omg. I just think that all the et maps are fine, there good, way better than the original maps from rtcw, but if you could make a couple of good realistic maps, and give it that whole combat feeling, lots of people would cry, i mean market garden is lovely if you actually seen the movie, and read some books about it.

(SCDS_reyalP) #9

In RTCW (and ET, I assume, though I haven’t checked) that should be 12 units = 1 foot. Player is 72 units tall, so this would make him 6 foot. Quake3 is different, since the players are quite a bit smaller.

Doing things to that scale won’t play very well either, since real humans are flexable and usually not as thick as they are wide. For gameplay, IMO, ceilings should be high enough to jump without hitting your head, and doorways should be wide enough for two players to get through without getting stuck.

(demoneye) #10

Strange - I got the 9/1 conversion from Mike Denny at GMI? Maybe I’ll just split the difference.

DeMoNeye

(bsimser) #11

sock,

Just wondering how you did this? In Radiant? I can’t see any option to set this up. Or are you talking about doing a map in MAX and then exporting it into Radiant? Thanks.

(sock) #12

sock,

Just wondering how you did this? In Radiant? I can’t see any option to set this up. Or are you talking about doing a map in MAX and then exporting it into Radiant? Thanks.[/quote]

Save your floor plans as a TGA image and then paint the texture onto a big floor brush and keep scaling it up with the Surface Inspector.

Sock
:moo: z0r