DM-Hope
- Thread starter Rabid Wolf
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
How is possible for a map to get a 7 for gameplay if it hits 450 polys?
I didn't like this particular review's scoring at all. I give it a 5.5
I didn't like this particular review's scoring at all. I give it a 5.5
Why the surprise at the score? After reading a few reviews here it's obvious the more eye candy and the higher the poly count, the higher the score....
In spite of what the schema says, things like playability, flow, bot pathing and item placement mean very little, all that really matters is if the reviewer thinks it looks good. Looks (esthetics) are supposed to be 30% and gameplay 70% of the final score, yet maps that have no gameplay to speak of but are pretty tend to get high scores and maps that play great but only look ok generally score a lot lower.
In spite of what the schema says, things like playability, flow, bot pathing and item placement mean very little, all that really matters is if the reviewer thinks it looks good. Looks (esthetics) are supposed to be 30% and gameplay 70% of the final score, yet maps that have no gameplay to speak of but are pretty tend to get high scores and maps that play great but only look ok generally score a lot lower.
the 450 is the absolute peak. you only get it if you come through one particular archway, and run down a particular straight line to a particular spot at the edge of a particular ledge, then look down. mostly it was definately playable polycount, which is why it got a 7.
Ya, I looked at the map since then and I agree it's quite playable. 7 is bang on the money I think.
50 % grapichs
50 % gameplay
if you dont ewant grapichs go play dukenukem or doom, the hardware gets stronger cause we can have more grapichs, and then people complain about the fact that they have too much grapichs ....
score of the map is not bad, maybe a bit lower but its ok
and no probs for 450 imo, k its slow, but too hell with that
50 % gameplay
if you dont ewant grapichs go play dukenukem or doom, the hardware gets stronger cause we can have more grapichs, and then people complain about the fact that they have too much grapichs ....
score of the map is not bad, maybe a bit lower but its ok
and no probs for 450 imo, k its slow, but too hell with that
Here's a direct quote from the review schema.
"Now, we've heard it mentioned time and time again that gameplay - speed, bots, etc. - is make or break for a level's quality, so we weighted the gameplay category as 70% of the final score. Therefore, Environment received a weight of 30%."
"Now, we've heard it mentioned time and time again that gameplay - speed, bots, etc. - is make or break for a level's quality, so we weighted the gameplay category as 70% of the final score. Therefore, Environment received a weight of 30%."
Well - this debate rages on
In my opinion - the map has to look the absolute dogs b*llocks before I go anywhere near it - game play can take care of itself if the map shines in the architecture/lighting department - You're not gonna get many mappers who can create a visually stunning map without thinking about the basic fundementals of map making - like flow etc - there are going to be exceptions - but not many
Seriously - you could have 4 boxes linked together with corridors and have a good fragfest but who the f*ck wants to play in that kind of environment? - C'mon - let's stop wallowing in yesteryear and live in the now - 450 polys is no problem - if it is - get a better PC and quite your whinning
Lruce
In my opinion - the map has to look the absolute dogs b*llocks before I go anywhere near it - game play can take care of itself if the map shines in the architecture/lighting department - You're not gonna get many mappers who can create a visually stunning map without thinking about the basic fundementals of map making - like flow etc - there are going to be exceptions - but not many
Seriously - you could have 4 boxes linked together with corridors and have a good fragfest but who the f*ck wants to play in that kind of environment? - C'mon - let's stop wallowing in yesteryear and live in the now - 450 polys is no problem - if it is - get a better PC and quite your whinning
Lruce
erm, yah, but 80 % of those ghey players that think they know ut suck big time and know **** of mapping and stuff, and 90 % of the serveradmins too, you really cant look at what they want, i substracted a cube once, and added 2 playersstarts, a shockrifle, and a rocketluancher in it, and putted it online at the biggest belgium UT community forum, their reaction :''****ing leet, this ownz'', and they still play it....
so now we should all start to make 1 cube maps cause people want that ...
so now we should all start to make 1 cube maps cause people want that ...
but are you people mapping for players, or mapping for mapping peer?
this question arises out of mere curiosity, not the wish to be provocative.
this question arises out of mere curiosity, not the wish to be provocative.
we map for ourself and the community, but i dont see some retards idiots who wants ghey cubes as part of that community cause they are too stupid theirself to understeand what a good map is
Look - we seriously have to get away from this "you gotta cater for the on-line audience bull****" - F*uck em - I build levels exclusively for home bot play - you know the average guy who likes to kick arse for 10-20 minutes at a time - make a sarnie and then watch a bit of telly - then the environment hits them right between the eyes - they look around the arena and think "F*ucking Hell - look at this place - then they start to cap some bot - and get involved in the fighting - but the visuals are always gonna pull them in - anyone who says different is a lying bast*rd - period
Sure - you're gonna have your mappers who count every f*ucking node/poly/occlusion time and all that **** - but then it becomes a war of technicalities instead of creativity - and then the whole thing becomes somewhat contrived
Build a level that's original - looks f*cking amazing and gives me a thrill for 15 minutes plus and you have my vote but a box that's ultra-fast for online play - errrrrr.....no
Lruce
Sure - you're gonna have your mappers who count every f*ucking node/poly/occlusion time and all that **** - but then it becomes a war of technicalities instead of creativity - and then the whole thing becomes somewhat contrived
Build a level that's original - looks f*cking amazing and gives me a thrill for 15 minutes plus and you have my vote but a box that's ultra-fast for online play - errrrrr.....no
Lruce
pfsh
I have a high-end PC. I can play 1024*768*32 with high detail in normal maps, but in maps with more than 300 polys and more than 2 people in view i have to turn down my resolution or the framerate will drop below 40. Since the high-poly maps are few, i don't run UT in a lower res, and also don't bother playing them.
A playable 400-poly UT-map doesn't exist on today's computers.
I have a high-end PC. I can play 1024*768*32 with high detail in normal maps, but in maps with more than 300 polys and more than 2 people in view i have to turn down my resolution or the framerate will drop below 40. Since the high-poly maps are few, i don't run UT in a lower res, and also don't bother playing them.
A playable 400-poly UT-map doesn't exist on today's computers.
Off course they exist - most of my maps have some scenes that exceed 400 and it doesn't affect performance too much - now if you have a map that hits those kind of polys in view all the time then yeah - it's gonna suck - but I wouldn't be too concerned if one or two views hit 400-450= polys for a short while - I think it's a bit of a misconception that you should never build areas that hold 300/400 or even 500 polys in view so long as it isn't in a wide open courtyard etc - you gotta use your common sense really - so I don't concern myself with this issue too much
Lruce
Lruce
Actually, a map with the same high polycount all over is usually better. It shows you really make use of the polys, instead of just having a badly planned layout(that is not counting maps with high polycounts only in certain angles you never look).
DM-Brunel is NOT playable with my settings. As i tried to say in the above post, not many bother to turn down their res just to be able to play one or two maps.
DM-Brunel is NOT playable with my settings. As i tried to say in the above post, not many bother to turn down their res just to be able to play one or two maps.
i find 100-200 poly maps dead ugly now, im allready used to high poly stuff, so we should make high poly stuff imo, but above 400 really starts to be high indeed, pc's cant folow it :\
I totally agree with fragswill. Sure ppl online are morons for looks, but they do make up the majority of frequent players, I'd bet. To make me sound young, my father plays UT and has for a full year now, any type of gameplay, and some TacOps because the guns are cool. He played Brunel and thought it was incredible. I pointed out all the details and how you did them, and he was quite impressed. He's played online all of a few times, and heck he's 47 so who'd expect him to? I on the other hand played the map a few times and those few times were with less than 2 bots so that I could look at it. Making something phenomenal is great, but I also like to play, so make something in between and I'm happy. Sure 150 polys doesn't look so hot anymore, but the engine was made for it, and that hasn't changed.
You can map for CliffyB, but no one plays anything that 0wns his white ass.
You can map for CliffyB, but no one plays anything that 0wns his white ass.