Low-Budget Amateur Maps?
- Thread starter AlexanderII
- 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.
crap! we arent watching TV or listening to radio. stop those whacky comparing. If you eat a banana and not an apple it doesnt mean you are for child-labour. so CUT IT! and ut wih 60 people? what are you talking??? a small map in fact is oftne a VERY DETAILED ONE! 700-1000 brushes is normal!!! get off of your trip and say hello to the nurses!
Funny. But off-topic.
If the complexity is your only concern - that's only your opinion. If i put 1000 brushes on an open-area map and try to do some lighting my Geforce2 I'll be glad if my Geforce2 will give me 10 frames per second at some point in the game. Even on my simple map whan I make moving clouds and "shadows" from them I get a really slow motion. And That's still not as far as my imagination can go.
Sometimes I listen to the common sence. And it tells me that a perfect map does not have to be complex. If you implant an MP3-player into a hammer. It'll be much more expensive, but it's not necesserily going to be better than a regular hammer. It may even be not as durable as a simple hammer. Think about it.
Regards,
AlexanderII
I never said that simple means good. But I'm convinced that good things are simple. Someone said that it's easy to complexify, but it's hard to simplify.
Hence the good-old KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid)
Yes, Duke3d's old now. It's been 7 years since I started playing it. So, please, tell me about it.
There's always something to learn, but that does not mean that everyone has to listen only to you and do maps exactly as you tell. Don't you think that if a person is a newbie in map making he's not familiar with CAD, architecture, lighting, photography or whaterver else.
I guess, you'll have to figure that out yourself. I'm feeling humiliated by having to waste my time explaining simple things that no one seems to be listening anyway.
Regards,
AlexanderII
i was and still am to a certain extent, a noobie. i freely admit it.
but mooning after duke nukem maps as examples of good design is not the way to get better.
they have nothing to teach us that cant be taught better by other maps.
im not saying this is even what youare doing (mooning after duke maps) nostalgia is a great thing.
but duke style maps are last generation. and setting up a seperate division for maps of this style and similar maps is not the way to go forward. learning the unreal editor is tough. and if mappers are encouraged to think that they cant do full maps, or more interesting maps, by setting up a patronising little club.
also, mapping style is not limited.
i am not telling anyone how to make maps. im simply not in that position. but i cant help fealing that you should try some more maps before telling people that they should treat "low budget maps" as anything other than the first step on the path to wizdom/leetnes.
i suggest you try the following.
ctf-projextx2
dm-smallsoldiers (or some other davidm map)
dm-bastion
dm-chimera or imago
dm-titania][
and so on.
im sure if you ask, people will be able to suggest more great maps than me. but these should start you off nicely.
now stop sulking. im trying to help you.
mister_cope:
Thanks for pointing them out for me. That's exactly what I want: to be able to quickly find that particular kind of maps and look at nice and small maps. Why can't there be a small section dedicated to that? Is it too hard to maintain, or what?
Simply, why not?
Regards,
AlexanderII
Thanks for pointing them out for me. That's exactly what I want: to be able to quickly find that particular kind of maps and look at nice and small maps. Why can't there be a small section dedicated to that? Is it too hard to maintain, or what?
Simply, why not?
Regards,
AlexanderII
how bout a section where one goes to gouge ones eyes out cuz one can't read any more silliness in one thread...
ok ok just a joke
after art school my relatives would always ask me about "weird artist" like Yves Klein or Jeff Koons and say "well hell anything could be art then" . "If i stabbed somebody in the chest with a needle that would be art huh?". Yeah i replied just not very good art... but maybe somebody might could make great art out of stabbing someone in the chest with a needle and someone did, "Pulp Fiction".
Maps should be taken on a map by map basis. Thorns is the plainest map I know of yet everyone votes to play it cuz it can be fun.
Polycount don't equal cool, Simple don't equal great stabs to the chest with needles doesn't equal great art but sometimes the two do run into oneanother.
I'm a newbie to this forum so flame away but it seems the NaliCity site has a repository for maps that are reviewed and divided up through a defined system and the playtesting section is there to talk about testing maps and the eating kittens section is there to talk about eating kittens (hehe made you look)
ok ok just a joke
after art school my relatives would always ask me about "weird artist" like Yves Klein or Jeff Koons and say "well hell anything could be art then" . "If i stabbed somebody in the chest with a needle that would be art huh?". Yeah i replied just not very good art... but maybe somebody might could make great art out of stabbing someone in the chest with a needle and someone did, "Pulp Fiction".
Maps should be taken on a map by map basis. Thorns is the plainest map I know of yet everyone votes to play it cuz it can be fun.
Polycount don't equal cool, Simple don't equal great stabs to the chest with needles doesn't equal great art but sometimes the two do run into oneanother.
I'm a newbie to this forum so flame away but it seems the NaliCity site has a repository for maps that are reviewed and divided up through a defined system and the playtesting section is there to talk about testing maps and the eating kittens section is there to talk about eating kittens (hehe made you look)
You might want to take a look at DM-Manhunt. It's a tight little thing, but it oozes quality. Perhaps what you are talking about is simplicity in design, not in detail. Detail should never be kept simple. IMHO, the main distinctions between a n00b and a 1337 mapper lies in detail level and flow.
NC3 is bringing loads of new features. As of now, all the maps are lumped into broad categories based upon game-type. You know this, it's obvious enough to those who look at it right now. NC3 will supposedly have a sophisticated organization system. Exactly how it goes, I am not entirely certain. I do agree with you that one of the organization criteria needs to be map size. But size doesn't matter in map quality, it's how it's used.
Does anyone have any specifics on how the new database is going to function? It would be conveniant to be able to list maps that fit only certain criteria, though how to standardize playercount could be tough, if not impossible.
Edit/Clarification: I mean listing by criteria as like a search engine. i.e. Show me all maps made by Joe with a rating of 8 or higher
NC3 is bringing loads of new features. As of now, all the maps are lumped into broad categories based upon game-type. You know this, it's obvious enough to those who look at it right now. NC3 will supposedly have a sophisticated organization system. Exactly how it goes, I am not entirely certain. I do agree with you that one of the organization criteria needs to be map size. But size doesn't matter in map quality, it's how it's used.
Does anyone have any specifics on how the new database is going to function? It would be conveniant to be able to list maps that fit only certain criteria, though how to standardize playercount could be tough, if not impossible.Edit/Clarification: I mean listing by criteria as like a search engine. i.e. Show me all maps made by Joe with a rating of 8 or higher
i think the reason for the hatred of this idea is that the boundary between the two sections of maps you want is too vague, seemingly arbitrary boundary used to segregate in a similar way that Black people and White people were segregated, or Jew's and Muslims, etc.
The mappers will no longer have unlimited styles of mapping. They will always be aiming for either one of the two catagories. This idea will eliminate the uniqueness in every map.
to vilehelm:
I know what you mean. Me myself, I don't like abstract art, avant-gard, and things like those and in no sence am I promoting such "junk" in the map making. So get me right.
GoldenMouse:
I'm a player. In playing the game I enjoy playing the game. Cool textures, nice sounds, small details and architectural masterpieces don't replace the gameplay. I've seen lots of beautiful maps, but I can't find one I would enjoy playing. I find that generally the smaller maps have more action, in them. I like when there's a lot of action. Small not in the filesize, I mean, small geometry. Unless I'd want to practice company attacks, but that's what RTCV is good for - not very good, but certainly better than UT.
StoneViper:
There is always boundaries. There are reasons for segregation. And mappers never had the unlimited styles of mapping. The map has to follow certain guidelines in order to be playable. There are always limitations. The deathmatch is not CTF. I'm not saying that there must be two cathegories. But I think it makes sence to be able to sort the maps by the area of the battlefield. And don't you be worried about the uniqueness problem. The opposite will happen actually, the more cathegories there are, the more unique a map is. Will you agree?
Regards,
AlexanderII
I know what you mean. Me myself, I don't like abstract art, avant-gard, and things like those and in no sence am I promoting such "junk" in the map making. So get me right.
GoldenMouse:
I'm a player. In playing the game I enjoy playing the game. Cool textures, nice sounds, small details and architectural masterpieces don't replace the gameplay. I've seen lots of beautiful maps, but I can't find one I would enjoy playing. I find that generally the smaller maps have more action, in them. I like when there's a lot of action. Small not in the filesize, I mean, small geometry. Unless I'd want to practice company attacks, but that's what RTCV is good for - not very good, but certainly better than UT.
StoneViper:
There is always boundaries. There are reasons for segregation. And mappers never had the unlimited styles of mapping. The map has to follow certain guidelines in order to be playable. There are always limitations. The deathmatch is not CTF. I'm not saying that there must be two cathegories. But I think it makes sence to be able to sort the maps by the area of the battlefield. And don't you be worried about the uniqueness problem. The opposite will happen actually, the more cathegories there are, the more unique a map is. Will you agree?
Regards,
AlexanderII
So what do you think the new sorting criteria should be?
I suggest "area of the battlefield" as one of them.
Regards,
AlexanderII
I suggest "area of the battlefield" as one of them.
Regards,
AlexanderII
The only thing i really agree with you is that the smaller maps do have faster flow and are thus more fun, but,... not always. lots of small eye-candy maps just plain suck, other's are quite fun. This is why i've always loved CTF-Gauntlet.
I just think it it too unproffessional to classify ctf-orbital in a different catagory as ctf-niven.
lucifix
I did something m0tarded and now I have read only access! :(
hey sphincter boy, if you want "small" maps why not look at the file size? or how about this far out idea........READ THE REVIEWS!!!
you just dont get it. I am having a geforce2 too. And my last map had a bit more than 800 brushes. And it runs VERY VERY smooth on standard pcs.
And you are talking about off-topic? than cut your ****ing comparisons out! And it is still spelled "SENSE"!!! you are making no sense!