RealMaps

[Kibbles-N-Bits]

First off I'd like to apologize for dropping the ball on the site, so to speak. Now that that's out of the way, I've got a few questions for you all, considering the dev community is a bit more in-tune with the site than, say O/T.

What would you like to see done to the RealMaps website? Would you like to see a skins section? A section for all of the mutators and mods for INF? To me the site feels out-dated, both design- and function-wise.

Also, there may be the possibility of RealMaps getting its own server, separate from BU, depending on what I decide to do here. Personally we need an easy way for mappers and modders to share thier work with the community, meaning we need some type of file upload system or FTP access. If I do that, I would probably move RealMaps to my own server (it's on a great backbone, with about 12GB/month bandwidth).

What are your concerns and suggestions (Outside of just "Update the site, dammit!")?

[jaymian]

Cool. I think skins and mutators are a great thing to add. Thing about mutators however, is that they get updated a lot and also become outdated with new versions and so on. So that should be kept in mind. Maybe point out the release date along with what version it was designed for. I guess you could do that for all downloadables. I also think that there needs to be a place for ALL INF maps. At least since 2.80 anyway. Right now there's a few at Realmaps, and a few at Combatmaps, and a few located elsewhere. It can be a pain for new folks to try and find all these various community maps. Also, Realmaps has a tendency to stop grabbing maps during "slow" periods of INF development. Like right now for instance. Maps have been made and released, but Realmaps has not been reviewing or hosting them. That creates holes in the map listing. I would think it would be easier to keep the site updated now rather than 2 weeks after a new release. You would only have to update like once a month. One man could do it. It's a lot to ask. I just hate to see Realmaps like it is now. I hope more people can take some interest and help out if you need it. I personally don't think I would be a good reviewer, and I have no experience with websites. Mine is a cheesy Frontpage slap together. So I won't volunteer myself. Sorry. Hope Realmaps can get back on it's feet, and stay there

[Los Pescados]

Kibbles.. been trying to get ahold of you re: all of this.. toss me an email when ya get a chance.. mike@sentrystudios.net

Mike

[das_ben]

Yeah, I agree with what Jay said about community maps being too spread out. I remember some weeks ago when I decided to grab the latest maps for a few servers I spend ages searching for them and ran into a lot of dead links. So, I'd say a complete archive of maps, skins and mutators should be priority. Map reviews are nice to read and definitely good feedback for the mapper, but other than that, I feel they're mostly useless nowadays. Most server admins don't decide on what gets into the rotation by reading the reviews, but by asking the community. And I believe that's a good thing, because I feel that a lot of the maps get rated too high on RealMaps. I understand that they're haven't been any really bad maps lately, but if you take a closer look you'll notice that almost every map got excellent ratings, even if none of them compare to the classics [by Angelheart, T. Ahlen & SentryStudios] at all. This may be the result of having people that are closely connected to the community as reviewers, they don't want to piss anyone off [or really enjoy almost anything that has to do with Infiltration] and thus lose their objectivity. But maybe that's just me.

[mat69]

I think you're right reaper, same problem for me
Too less distance, to inf.

I'd suggest a system like combatmaps.com, only a bit different. You or someone else simply adds a new map, maybe without text and even pictures, just clean hosting. Then everybody (registered!!!) has the possibilty to write a personal review (with otherall rate, or maybe rate for fun, graphics ...), it should be even possible to upload a few pictures. But if you upload a picture, the admin or someone else should automatically get a link to the review and/or to the picture. So that there is always a kind of a moderator.

As I am thinking a bit, it also should be allowed to upload zips by SuperUsers (registered mappers - who have to register them and to write in this forum that they are registered, so that nobody can register himself as angleheart without being AH), which should be automatically downloadable, but also there the admin or ... should get an e-mail.

I think this system would be the future, because the work is splitted to the people. They can wrote what they think, they can even post bugs and in a special bugs-part. So that you click on a map and then on bugs, now you know all written bugs. This would for the people who does not visit this forum much, or for the maps/mutators ... which are "final".

And do not make a really One-Man-show this would be death to RM. Because if you do not have time, RM does not have time ...
Please consider making a system like I've suggested with different user types and there rights (I do not know if this is hard to design).

Then really nobody could say, hey this map is not on RM, hey there is no review, or hey the map is too high rated --> "make it yourself better!"
The community would show if they really (!) want to make it better.

Edit: It also should be easy for every visitor to see the newest uploaded maps (by you by super users) and the newest reviews (by you by ....).
For "reviews" of mutators --> every mutator should have a description box, with all features in it, now everybody could write a "review" about the mutator (the perfect settings ....)

But really important is that only registered posters can wrote reviews ... so that they can (!) be moderated, it is frustrating to read 4 sites of dump only to have one site information like in the "***OFFICIAL Infiltration 2.9 Release Discussion Thread, v2***" (same with v1), so I stopped reading it.

It still should possible to comment reviews ...

[w00p]

Actually, I like the design as it is now.
Yes, you could add a mutators and skins page, but after all, its realmaps...
And I think the reviews are a very good thing.

And one thing I kinda dislike: adding your own reviews. A comments sytem, yes, but reviewing the maps again, is useless.

As for the mapper uploading his maps on his own behalf, this is a nifty idea... Only Beta's should be uploaded by the mapper himself, and put on a special section with some simple php script linking to all latest uploads to a specific folder. (ftp/beta, beta/betamaps, beta/betaskins, beta/betamuties would be the only folders the public account(eg: user: author pass:realmaps) could access)

user score, ok, but make it insightfull...

Actually, the current design of realmaps is very proffessional and good. It may be outdated, but it works like a charm!
Wich genius made that design?

[Big_Duke_06]

I think that community review scores are very helpful. I'd like to see not just the main review and scores, but also an average community score for the map - maybe just overall, or maybe in one or two categories. And keep it as a running average.

That should be almost as useful as having full-blown community written reviews. You'd be able to see which maps were a bit over-rated or under-rated by the reviewer based on the community score.

Just do the standard stuff you would otherwise do on polls and such - one vote per registered user. That should keep the S/N ratio pretty clean.

Matthew

[Fenris]

Maybe not really with INF 2.86/2.9 in mind, but sure with whatever the 2k3/4 version may be called, a section for community-works. I'm especially thinking of static meshes, as they are gonna be do-or-die in anything 2k3/4 based.

Apart from that... Erm... Um... With EAS in mind, I'd like to see the size of the map in u² or converted to m²/ft², and (for EAS) some key figures like the usual zones of action, distance from spawn to objective, maybe a nifty 2D map and the like.

Something for the tactics people, like it was(is) available for maps at infiltrationmod.de...

[ninjin]

i noticed that there are maps everywhere, so i was thinking it would be much easier for most of us if the maps are centralized in one place so that even the beginner mapper would be able to get some feed back rather than having to look are different sites and groups of reviewers to get their opinions. I also think a skin/mutator (mutator to a lesser extent) addition would be great as centralization will definately help newbies near the release of 2.90

[Keganator]

As far as mutators, now that kegnet.net is going back up, so shall Project Infiltration. I'm swinging into my productivity mode right now A place for 'everything else' is what it will be, basically. Or, that's the intent. It should be able to let authors upload/update their content, too. Of course, I don't want to make it so you don't want to do anything, since time has shown some of my promises to be a bit flakey, but I really want all this to come about, and I am working hard on it

One other thing: Kibbles! We miss you in irc...heck, everywhere

[mat69]

"beta"-mutators does not work as ra286final has shown allready.

The point with the community-review-system (like this one, but also with ratings for graphics ... and an overall rating) is that otherwise it is just a number, but why is it "5"? Is it "5" of having really bad graphics, layout ....?! "5" can make a lot of fun online, but if you only see "5" you maybe won't download one of the greatest mulitplayer-maps (was just an example ).

[jaymian]

I'm starting to think reviews are not necessary for community maps and so on. You can see this when a new server asks what maps should be on it. It's a community frenzy trying to determine what should be on there. Two people can go to each extreme on one map, one loving it, one hating it. Also, online vs offline are pretty different. So no matter what a map scores, there will be community and even mapper criticism.

I think the most important thing to show for a map is a few screen shots, and a description. Reviews can be nice, but because people vary so much in opinion, you may as well have screens and description to let people judge for themselves. And besides, it's a free mod with free maps, so it's not like you blew $50 on it. If you find out it sucks, get rid of it. I like the Combatmaps system with the screenshots and a description. Maybe elaborate a little more on the description, like having the description attached to the screenshots to help visualize the maps. And then have a few key features to all maps, like gameplay, lighting, textures, location and so on for the community to vote on. I think Realism alone is too broad. It seems to include textures, lighting, sounds, and whether or not the whole map seems believable. But then again, maybe seperating every thing out is too cumbersome for most people.

So maybe a voting system for the community to "review" the map, and a good description of the map is all that is needed. This way, it would be a lot easier to get a map hosted, and out to the people, and easier on the website team.

Personally as a mapper, I only liked the reviews because it was also a link to my map for people to grab it. But I didn't like my map being nitpicked. It depended too much on who was reviewing it, and what annoyed them the most about maps. And it always seemed like my maps had something in them that pissed off the reviewer. I also got the idea that my maps are hard to understand. I guess my crack smoking map ideas are to far out there

[BattlePriest]

Since I came back to INF (after my long rage induced Hiatus) I havent yet been able to catch a game on any of the RAv2 servers I used to frequent...the main reason I decided to start playing RA was because the RA server admins werent afraid to add new maps to test out. Or add maps requested by players. If they had good flow and people liked em, they got to stay a while...thats the best system.....if there was one location someone could find ANY new maps (or old maps that come back to circulation) added to servers, whether they have a review or NOT... that would be great...kinda like Nali City...they host all maps..only some are reviewed.....but they host any map.

The sad thing is this...the only current active Vanilla INF server left, MUF2001, is still poulated with the same old maps its always had...forever...Flagstaff, MWH, Dockside, Norwich, etc.... every single person knows every single detail of those maps..theres no suspense, no tension, no skill other than who can get to what LOF first as fast as possible to kill the other guy before he gets to his LOF first to kill you..everyone knows where to stop and fire every single roudn and what corners you can run aroung spraying and get a kill.... Every few minutes or so a little ad pops up int he text box say "go to the MUF server forums to request new maps" or something like that... well I did..a lot of other people did, yet no one ever added or chaged any maps new or old... then all of the sudden last week some new maps got added, wait not new OLD ass crusty maps that sucked the first time they got server time...OfficeAssault, Flood (good map very detailed..but play sucks on it), etc..even Deck16!!!! non of these were requested int he forums...why they hell would they put them on the server....and why the hell wont they put the maps people ak for...MUF has an average 30 second map download for a 10 meg map...its such a waste that MUF isnt being used to cycle thorugh the many good maps the community has produced....no map database is needed when you have such a great DL speed online...WHY WHY WHY.... but I know Im preaching to the quoir here...

Let me get back tot he point.... host maps at RealMaps, regardless of whether or not they have reviews written, if theyre INF maps..they should have a home to DL from...

BTW K&B... sometime in the near/far future i may be interested in reviewing again...Ill let ya know....if you need any....

***EDIT*** DISCLAIMER
I fyou are the creator of any of the maps i said suck....I apologize...but some maps...just dont play well...especially on a vanilla server ..I think you know what I mean

[Freon]

Hmm I think reviews should stay. Criticism is a good thing, for players and mappers. A reviewer can explain why he likes or hates a map and point at the bugs or design flaws he found. Firstly, it helps players and server admins to chose between maps. And secondly, it gives feedback to the mapper. A good review will tell them what should stay in their future maps. A bad review (scorewise) will tell mappers what to get rid of.
Comments are often one-liners and not very helpful like "this map sucks!1" or "best map evar!!1". So they're an options
About community maps being too spread out, I don't think it will be a problem once 2.9 is released. All these old DM maps will either be converted or forgotten.

[jaymian]

Originally Posted by Freon

About community maps being too spread out, I don't think it will be a problem once 2.9 is released. All these old DM maps will either be converted or forgotten.

That wasn't something I wanted to hear. Basically all my maps, and all the other great TDM and DOM maps are going to be forgotten, if they already haven't been. I guess that just scares me a bit. It makes me realize that maps have a short lifespan. I honestly don't feel like going back through all of my maps and converting them. INF 2.9 will have raised the bar on maps to a level I doubt I could easily reach. It also seems that EAS maps have to be rather large to accomidate the gametype flow and gameplay. Basically only a few of my maps would be capable to match that, and even if they did, they would need significant work on them to be updated. Mapping after INF 2.9 is a huge debate for me in the first place. I forsee community maps as being overlooked by the large quantity of very high quality official 2.9 maps. How can we compete with 2 years of online professional testing? It just feels like a bit of a kick in the face after all the mapping I have done. Maybe I'll just do something really cheesy like combine a bunch of my maps to make one large enough. EAS-INF-UndergroundFloodedHuntingCabin

As for Realmaps, I just hope it doesn't get closed down. I saw a post by the BUF admins in offtopic reguarding what might happen to Realmaps. If it looses all those maps, that will really suck. If they stick to reviews or not, I'm fine with whatever they do as long as they don't dissappear. But I guess if they do, they will be forgotten anyway since they are all TDM and other non 2.9 gametypes . If they do stick with reviews, then I still think they need all maps. Or maybe, Realmaps can do all the reviews of a few maps, which is already the case, and Combatmaps can grab all INF maps and conitinue with a few pics with a description. I'm not sure if that is possible because of limited space issues. I just like the way Combatmaps handles uploads and stuff like that. They are pretty quick lately to help host maps for community mappers.

[mat69]

About forgetting maps: I think the players who really played the maps won't forget (forget the name, ok, but if they play the map again the will "re-know" the map ) them, if they weren't played they are maybe allready forgotten. That's bad in this "buisness", if you get new maps to easily you don't appreciate the effort the mappers have put into there maps. It is like watching a B-Movie on TV, you watch it, laugh a bit or what else, you forget it. This also happens to the good maps, because of only a few servers "playing" them.
Some people say that there is a lack of maps/mappers. Really? It can also be the other way round, that there were just soo many (too much?) mappers here, maybe too much for this small mod.
And do you really think, that with 2.9 no TDM-Maps will be played? I do not think so, they will soon ( ) come, with TDM. The only really big problem is, that a server can only have one gametype, if it would be like in quake there would not be a problem.

I do not think that we could host all (I mean the "older") maps, which RM is hosting. I e.g. still have an 1 GB volume-limit and this won't change as it seems in the near future, maybe it will change "soon"...
It would be great, if we would work more together, but the question is how, I mean it is not very usefull if you are reading a review, but then have to move to another homepage to download the reviewed map. The other way round it is the same. You could now say, why don't you make just one site? But what site would "die"? What would be with the german-section of CM.de? .... And what would be with the owners of both sites (I'm only newswriter ..., Jogi owns the site, he is the coder, the heart behind CM).

As Keg I am for centralization, it is death to a mod (especially for new players) if you have to visit 10 homepages, 2 forums to be actual. I downloaded True Combat 1.0 (played also the old betas ) a few months ago, then I did not play much and stopped. Now I wanted it to play again. I could only join on a few servers, because I had to download files (you maybe know that autodownload is slow and mostly turned of on many q3-servers), so me, "poor" guy had to visit one (!) [he centralisation] site to download the files, but I was still pissed off.
One file was not there, had to search it in a forum, now I can play on every server (had to download ~50mb extra stuff).
Somehow you are still in "rage", but it is much better then to get frustrated of not finding the stuff as it really easy happens in INF.

Now there are about two maybe four hps which offer camos. I don't want that all of those sites go down (like Information with an own Camo-section), but what I would find great is, if those sites would be connected other a database, this would also make the server-hps more usefull (every download which is needed simply links to the database).

So hmm, my brain is empty now.

[Freon]

jaymian:
1) 2.9 still has DOM
2) 2.9 still has small(ish ) maps

Moreover, a DOM map can be converted to EAS quite easily. So I hope all the AS and DOM maps will be converted to 2.9. DM maps on the other hand will fade away unless they are converted.

[jaymian]

So, exactly what gametypes does INF 2.9 have? I'd like to think it would keep the old, while adding some new, but it sounds like I may be wrong. I'd ask in the official 2.9 thread, but last I checked, it is disreguarded because of large quantity of spam and bs. Too bad for that. I just got the idea that EAS required a large map. At least for a 16 people server.

Any news on Realmaps? Kibbles?

[BattlePriest]

Gametypes supported in 2.9

EAS
Specialist
TDM
DOM
CTF

I would expect after its release, most servers will be running the new gametypes...which were the main focus of the dev team...I got a chance to play EAS and Specialist (bot only)with RC1 when I was writing and developing the rules for the former ILCR Strategy League. I absolutely love EAS and Specialist and would hope that there will always at least one server running EAS or Specialist gametypes. But what I suspect is going to happen is this:

Former RA players will absolutely LOVE EAS and Specialist, its addition of a more realistic mission objective and mission purpose will appeal to them. Some Former 2.86 Vanilla players will like them as well but many of the vanilla run and gunners wont have the patience or teamwork needed for it..and they will lose interest, which will make another split in the community like the Vanilla RA split....

EAS/Specialist VS Classic TDM

However, there are absolutely no TDM maps in the new official mappacks, they are all EAS/Specialist based. So TDM will have to rely on either old TDM maps either official or Community, or someone will have to convert the EAS maps to TDM....

I may be wrong..but thats how I see it going down....

On another note: I personally would love to see an EAS version of DM-Underground.. its screaming for EAS....

[Fat Marrow]

Partly repeating what has been said before, I think a key objective of RealMaps should be to host every/any community map (within reason), and as a secondary objective to have a review (however small) for each such map.

IMHO this is what made it special in the old days (and particularly useful for offline-only players, like I was back then, and, er, recently).

The other thing I would suggest is to bring back the 'most recent comments' feature on the front page -- this helps to keep the site 'fresh', and can stimulate interesting debates over maps (which can in turn help to correct unfair reviews).

Just my $0.02.