PDA

View Full Version : How many maps?


Bullet10k
1st Jul 2005, 08:35 PM
How many maps do you think is reasonable for UT2007? Notice I said "reasonable" and not "would you like" because with the new engine I think it takes a lot longer to make maps than it previously did because of all the extra detail. We all want 300 excellent looking and playing maps but it just cant happen.

Strider_Izzy
1st Jul 2005, 09:17 PM
the more the merrier!!! although too many maps could have too many decisions and waste memory for an engine thats low-end friendly. but for the rest of us. i think 85+ is ok

MrSmiles
1st Jul 2005, 09:26 PM
don't forget there's gametypes you want atleast 10 for each gametype and there's prolly gonna be a few new games

Bullet10k
1st Jul 2005, 10:28 PM
Dont forget, quality>quantity, and also we dont want maps with graphics (the map art) dumbed down.

Taleweaver
2nd Jul 2005, 04:24 AM
don't forget there's gametypes you want atleast 10 for each gametype and there's prolly gonna be a few new games
Actually, UT2007 is going to have less gametypes (thread (http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=156671)). It won't have assault, bombing run or domination, so there shouldn't be maps for it either. Only conquest is new.

I don't know about you guys, but ever since map voting showed up, everyone voted for the same maps over and over again (can you recall much online games of maps like Desolation, Moondragon or Rrajigar?). You can't change ppl's atitude, so I'd say that it's better to put more focus on the maps you have, rather than have lots of maps that don't do more than take up hard disk space...Or rather: that take up lots of disk space (Desolation takes up 50 MB, and I doubt newer maps will be much smaller).

Hmm...4 different types of maps (DM, CTF, ONS, CONQ), 5 gametypes (add in TDM), about 10 decent maps for each gametype...50 should be a reasonable total

EL BOURIKO
2nd Jul 2005, 04:57 AM
about 15 maps per game types.

for instance 15 for DM -->

3 of them Low Grav
(1 map designed for 8 or more players, 1 map for 3 to 7 players, 1 map for 1on1)

3 of them Long range maps (with wide open areas)
(1 map designed for 8 or more players, 1 map for 3 to 7 players, 1 map for 1on1)

3 of them Close combat (with tight rooms and corridors)
(1 map designed for 8 or more players, 1 map for 3 to 7 players, 1 map for 1on1)

3 of them where technical moves becomes a real advantage to pick up bonus
(1 map designed for 8 or more players, 1 map for 3 to 7 players, 1 map for 1on1)

3 of them a mix of some of the 4 previous aspects
(1 map designed for 8 or more players, 1 map for 3 to 7 players, 1 map for 1on1)

that s how I see the thing, but of course I may be totally wrong.

Almost
2nd Jul 2005, 05:03 AM
I totally agree with Bullet. Quality over quantity. If that means we won't get more than 3-4 maps for each gametype, so be it. There are plenty of very talented mapmakers in the community.

Selerox
2nd Jul 2005, 07:50 AM
Map breakdown that I hope/expect there to be in UT2007:

25 DM
10 CTF
10 ONS
5 CON

Conquest will have huge and complex maps, so I don't expect that they'll be vey many of them.

As far as I remember, UT99 had around 50, and that was more than enough. As has already been said, quality > quantity. Maps with solid gameplay as the top priority are what we want. Make them good as good as possible, but never at the expense of gameplay.

One thing I do hope is that Epic will make sure that there are very few "gimmick" maps in there. That includes maps with deformable terrain. If they do include them, I hope they're in addition to, rather than instead of gameplay maps.

Bullet10k
2nd Jul 2005, 11:08 AM
IMO I think 60 is PERFECT. 15 for each gametype. Considering that some of the maps will be ported over from previous UT's (the best ones) I think 60 is possible.

Bullet10k
2nd Jul 2005, 11:20 AM
Map breakdown that I hope/expect there to be in UT2007:

25 DM
10 CTF
10 ONS
5 CONIf were going to have UNEVEN number of maps for each gametype (thats fine) then I think CTF should get almost the same priority as DM. So say about 20 CTF would be great (which would bring it to 60). Or make that 15 CTF and 8 CON and 12 ONS (which would bring it to 60 once again:D :lol: ). Neways I think of CTF as Deathmatch with objectives and its a bit more fun (IMO ofcourse), so CTF cant have less than half the number of maps of DM.

Vault
2nd Jul 2005, 12:02 PM
its really funny....... Bullet, i assume you were the one who posted this in the Atari Forums. At the Atari forums, most people voted for less than 40, while here at BU most of us vote for 90+

NeoNite
2nd Jul 2005, 12:15 PM
100.000

Almost, nice avatar. Kind off looks familiar...

Vault
2nd Jul 2005, 08:21 PM
100.000

Almost, nice avatar. Kind off looks familiar...

thinks it's from that Alan Wake trailer

Bullet10k
2nd Jul 2005, 11:09 PM
nvm

T2A`
2nd Jul 2005, 11:51 PM
I voted ~50. With less gametypes and no "copy-paste" jobs like going from UT2003 to UT2004, there's no need for there to be near 100 maps. Besides, there are more votes for 60 or less than 85+ in this poll...

Defeat
3rd Jul 2005, 12:32 AM
>I hope they rethink and add in bombing run, it was one of the coolest gametypes. What Epic could do is let you pick the stuff you want to install, like gametypes and maps, then only them.

Vault
3rd Jul 2005, 12:35 AM
Bombing Run with vehicles.... hmmmm

Nosnos
3rd Jul 2005, 03:53 AM
I would gladly see just 8 DM-maps if they are all good... it's not the number of maps that matter, I think UT2003/UT2004 proved that a little bit to well ^^

Sahkolihaa
3rd Jul 2005, 03:55 AM
Not too many and not too few I say.

Selerox
3rd Jul 2005, 04:48 AM
I would gladly see just 8 DM-maps if they are all good... it's not the number of maps that matter, I think UT2003/UT2004 proved that a little bit to well ^^

Agreed, UT2004 had a lot of real nigtmares in there. Here's the list (IMO) of the DM maps which should never have seen the light of day:

Serpentine (it's also a rip-off of a Quake2 map)
Curse4 (not better than 3)
HyperBlast2
Icetomb
Inferno
Injector
Insidious
IronDeity
Leviathan
Oceanic
Plunge
Sulphur
TrainingDay (Shouldn't have been included as playable outside of the SP game)
Most of the 1on1 maps.

Mr.Magnetichead
3rd Jul 2005, 05:33 AM
Why do you need so many?

You don't. You need about half a dozen really good maps for each game type. Most people only stick to a few maps they really like anyway. Cramming game modes with filler just detracts from the good maps and wastes developers time.

Wowbagger
3rd Jul 2005, 06:15 AM
Because (Unreal) history tells us that only 30-50% of the maps are good/being played?

Sure we could ask for only 10 "good" maps for each gametype but what are "good" maps?
I get the impression that the Epic LD:s has a different view plus that they feel the need to add "fun" maps.

Selerox
3rd Jul 2005, 06:40 AM
they feel the need to add "fun" maps.

Which never get played. The most played maps in the game tend to be the ones with balanced gameplay. They also tend to be the ones that are popular in clan matches (in all gametypes), I'm not saying maps have to be made in that style, but clan players usually pick gameplay above all else when it comes to maps.

Slainchild
3rd Jul 2005, 06:45 AM
Like I said over at INA:
I remember reading or hearing in an interview somewhere that there would be around the same amount of content that shipped with UT2003. Can't remember how many maps that was though...
:)

Taleweaver
3rd Jul 2005, 09:34 AM
>I hope they rethink and add in bombing run, it was one of the coolest gametypes. What Epic could do is let you pick the stuff you want to install, like gametypes and maps, then only them.
I agree it's the best gametype UT2004 has to offer (can't say anything of UT2003), but have you taken a look at the servers lately? ATM there are exactly 14 human players online playing it (13 of them are on Jolt). I don't really see a reason why Epic should create a whole gametype (with needed maps) for a 'handfull' of gamers, even though they absolutely love this gametype.

I recall an INA thread about creating a BR mod for UT2007, and frankly, I must say I trust the community more to create a good bombing run mod for the next game than Epic.

O.S.T
8th Jul 2005, 08:05 PM
15 maps in total

because then I could know them all
in UT2004 I scroll through masses of maps and know about 5% of them

Mr.CrackPot
23rd Jul 2005, 12:27 AM
I like sex ;)

lmao

Bullet10k
23rd Jul 2005, 12:49 AM
I like sex ;)

lmao
your first post is that:rolleyes:

klasnic
23rd Jul 2005, 09:38 AM
Actually, UT2007 is going to have less gametypes (thread (http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t=156671)). It won't have assault, bombing run or domination, so there shouldn't be maps for it either. Only conquest is new.

I don't know about you guys, but ever since map voting showed up, everyone voted for the same maps over and over again (can you recall much online games of maps like Desolation, Moondragon or Rrajigar?). You can't change ppl's atitude, so I'd say that it's better to put more focus on the maps you have, rather than have lots of maps that don't do more than take up hard disk space...Or rather: that take up lots of disk space (Desolation takes up 50 MB, and I doubt newer maps will be much smaller).

Hmm...4 different types of maps (DM, CTF, ONS, CONQ), 5 gametypes (add in TDM), about 10 decent maps for each gametype...50 should be a reasonable total

Dittoed all that and I'd go for even less 5/6 for each gametype and concentrate on making a better game first of all. Then, let the community build the maps and let's have a few add-on maps packs etc at a later date ;)

JaFO
23rd Jul 2005, 10:47 AM
Which never get played. ....
correction : which rarely get played on-line
off-line vs bots I play maps I wouldn't even dream of playing vs humans ...

I kind of hope that the maps that are part of the Conquest-map can be played separately as ONS-maps as well.
That would give ONS acces to a few more maps over and above the ONS-only maps.

blutspender
23rd Jul 2005, 12:24 PM
Dont forget, quality>quantity, and also we dont want maps with graphics (the map art) dumbed down.

Exactly what I thought when I saw this thread

Selerox
23rd Jul 2005, 05:03 PM
correction : which rarely get played on-line
off-line vs bots I play maps I wouldn't even dream of playing vs humans ...

I genuinly don't give a damn about bots, so the way I play the game, they don't get played. Fair enough, people play the game offline (which is 100% cool IMO), but it's not the way I play it, and the novelty maps simply don't factor into my view of the game at all. I've actually deleted quite a few of them to save space, along with all the ONS/AS/DDOM/BR maps as well.

->Sachiel<-
24th Jul 2005, 08:49 AM
UT2004 is the biggest game ever made, due to MAPS. Even though I have 250 gig worth of hard drive space I think its rediculous. Over 40 maps is crazy to me, I'd rather see very few but AMAZING maps

Lord of Midnight
31st Jul 2005, 07:43 AM
Then, let the community build the maps and let's have a few add-on maps packs etc at a later date ;)

IMHO one of the reasons why BR and DOM are played not much is the lack of quality maps. It can be a dangerous way if Epic let the comunity build the maps, but I vote quality over quantity without doubt.

BadAss84
31st Jul 2005, 08:34 AM
One thing I do hope is that Epic will make sure that there are very few "gimmick" maps in there.

Can't agree more, there are just far too many gimmicky type maps in 2k4 imo and they are just taking up space that could be used for some good quality maps.

They definately need to think quality over quantity, like 10-15 dm maps max and make them all quality playable maps that focus on gameplay first and foremost. Anyone who voted 85+ clearly didn't read the word 'reasonable' in the first post, for 5 gametypes around 40 maps is probably reasonable if you want GOOD maps, if you want usless space fillers like half the maps in 2k3/4 then im sure 85+ is what you'd call reasonable, but i for one would like to have maps that are actually close to playable :D

Which never get played. The most played maps in the game tend to be the ones with balanced gameplay. They also tend to be the ones that are popular in clan matches (in all gametypes), I'm not saying maps have to be made in that style, but clan players usually pick gameplay above all else when it comes to maps.

Also agreed :)

Kingman3
7th Aug 2005, 12:08 AM
20 DM (5 1v1)
10 CTF
6 ONS
4 CON

There will be remakes and map packs abound, so 40 should be plenty.

Neophoenix
7th Aug 2005, 01:16 AM
I think UT2004 did it the best way, and i don't mean portting all the crapp other from 2003. What i mean is have a few kick ass maps per game type, say ten or less, than let the community do the rest. I think the best thing UT2004 had going for it was those comunity bonus packs. They had some high quality maps in there, with kicking game play IMO.

One of Epics problems is not including all the game types in Single player (SP) mode. That always pissed me off, because I wanted to play LMS and ONS in the tournament style of Single Player mode, but couldn't. And personaly I feel this negitively effects the popularity of new game types because most the new commers will play SP before heading to online play.