|
Challenge:
Home
News Archive
Forums
CPMA
Maps
Smackdown2
People
Coverage
Features
Interviews
Links
Help Wanted
Powered by:
Columns:
Hosted
3.A.C
Interfaced
QWF
Affiliates:
Cached
Methos
Killer Instincts
CPL Europe
|
Thursday, 20 April 2000 -
Where Are the Mappers? ? $comment_count ?>
It's amazing given the amount of attention the "lack of decent maps" in Q3A is getting right now, that there seems to be a complete absence of any "professional mappers" (with the exception of jude) responding to the need. I have spent the last three weeks downloading various custom maps looking for a decent 1on1 map and so far I have found nothing really useful. All the custom maps seem to be made by people who are more interested in "architecture" and "atmosphere" than the competitive gameplay.
Sadly, I think a lot of the "custom mappers" might not care too much for the competitive Quake scene. I spoke to one who did primarily Quake 1 maps and he told me that since the "hardcore" players ignored his custom maps for years while playing the default id set (DM2, DM4 and DM6) he had little inclination to help them out now. How representative is this attitude? I don't know, but I don't exactly see a lot of mappers coming forward and offering to make competitive 1on1 maps. The same mapper I talked to told me that he made maps for 4-5 player FFA and if they worked for 1on1 that was a lucky bonus. The only mapper I know of who is thinking consciously about 1on1 is jude, who is recently interviewed on TrueGamers (we also interviewed him here on CHWD).
So what is the problem with the id Software maps? Opinions vary, but it basically boils down to the fact that the maps seem to be designed more for a mixture of bots and newbies than for "competitive" players. This is summed up in entertaining fashion by Exodus in his column over on TrueGamers:
One of the coolest things about Quake2 was that there was so much shit to jump on. The Edge was only cool because of all the trick jumps you could pull off. Quake1 and Quake2 were full of things to jump on and hide behind. It added color to the game... Yet, in Quake3 we're left with our bland rooms where clipping brushes abound, turning entire levels into the game equivelant of a rubber room. I want my boxes back. I want my ladders back. I want my strangely shaped pillars and other such things.
What can we do about this situation? Well not much, except continue to look throught the available custom maps, and encourage any mapper who would like to try their hand at a "competitive" map to come forward. It's not an easy job, however, as the community are very demanding about their 1on1 maps. Just looking at the slathering id Software are getting for maps which are technically among the best is not very encouraging.
It would help if there were some universally agreed rules about what makes a good 1on1 map but the "science" remains poorly understood. There must be reasons who some maps work better for 1on1 than others, but no-one has yet succeeded in analysing those reasons. We all know it has something to do with the flow of gameplay and the item placement, the number of "tricks" which can be performed, and even the "atmosphere" (though obviously this alone is not sufficient). But quite how these ingredients are mixed is still a bit of a mystery.
What is it that the competitive 1on1 community wants from a 1on1 map? Does it need to play hard and fast, or strategic, or both? What sort of strategies for "control" are determined by the map structure and item placement? Are there a million and one different variations, or a few fundamental types? Is there some sort of "blueprint" a good mapper could follow, or some fundamental rules? Does a mapper have to start afresh and invent "a totally new map" or can s/he borrow from previously successful designs? Would that be wrong?
These are all questions which the mapping community and the competitive gaming community need to work together to answer. Unfortunately, they don't work together very well at all. The mappers, as far as I can tell, don't seem to be that interested in "competitive" gaming and the competitive gamers aren't that interested in the "map" (in fact they turn gfx down so much it must pain a lot of mappers).
I've been wanting to create a "maps" section here at CHWD to try and bring these two groups together for a long time. In fact, I've asked about three different people if they'd like to help over the past few months, without success. Finally Jude has said that he might be able to help us to design some new maps, some that will hopefully also work for promode. He's already been highly successful with q3jdm8a, and he's now working on a new map which is being designed with some of the principles of DM6 in mind.
This is not the way that Jude normally works, so it is something of an experiment to see if a 1on1 map can be designed from "principles". Maybe it can and maybe it can't. Maybe maps are like songs - you just never know if you've written a good one until lots of people come back and say "hey, that was a really catchy tune".
Comments
|
|
|
|
| Hoony, have you asked the mappers Preacher (aerowalk) and Ghandi (the 'naked' maps) to do maps for PM? Those two were by far my favourite (Q1) mappers.. |
|
|
|
|
Hi
We don t only want duel maps, we want also TeamDM maps !
maybe the mission pack will help?
dunki |
|
|
|
|
Interesting thing about teamDM maps, when I asked the same mapper about them he told me that he seldom (if ever) tried to make a 4vs4 map because (a) he preferred to make FFA 4-5 and (b) TeamDM maps tend to be a lot bigger and his computer couldn't handle it :P. Dunno how much this affects mappers in general, as I have no idea what the impact of Q3 map size is on a typical high-end computer.
Will be interesting to see what id produce in the mission pack map-wise. The only thing I've seen so far (in the screenshots) is a space-map though. It also looks like they're releasing a market-driven product aimed at the swags of players who enjoy CS and TF rather than a product aimed at QIL.
|
|
|
|
|
bjebb, nope I haven't asked them yet, though I did ask Mr Fribbles to mention this news item on Peej 'n' Fribs so the mappers should become directly aware of the interest among the "competitive" playing community for new maps.
I wasn't going to approach them until I felt that promode had being developed enough so that we knew what type of gameplay the maps should be designed around. We're getting close to that point now.
It would be great to see some of the mappers and the "competitive" community working cloely together. I hope it happens. |
|
|
|
|
I've started a thread about this at the q3world editing forum, seeing as the set of people who map and read challenge-world is very small. I'd be grateful for any feedback on the points I make and anything that other mappers add.
The thread: http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Forum6/HTML/004439.html
Hoony, about 'that there seems to be a complete absence of any "professional mappers" (with the exception of jude) responding to the need': what about Peej and ZTN?
|
|
|
|
|
Re-reading the article, it occured to me that I don't know of any good competitive players (i.e. in QIL/got past FFA in CPL) making maps for the standard q3 modes (although I'd like to be corrected if I'm wrong). Why not?
The map-making community was not formed on the basis of a 'I'll just wait for other people to make maps for me' attitude. People wanted maps, they went out and made them. Why can't competive players do the same? There's hundreds of web-sites with tutorials, FAQ's, msg boards and many good irc channels. I'd estimate that someone intelligent enough to play good 1on1 could start mapping and make a playable map in five hours. After some practice, you can rough out (i.e. no fancy looks/architecture) a playable map in less than an hour. If you don't want to start a map from scratch, why not just play around with the items on existing maps? Don't like that rail gun on t4? Replace it with the weapon of your choice and see if it fits.
I'd say that 95% of mappers are your average joe '1 hour a day ffa, occasional lan party' players. It's unlikely that they're going to produce a competition level map on their own except by luck. Competitive players are going to have to take the initiative here, either by providing good, detailed feedback/beta-testing or making maps themselves. |
|
|
|
|
| As maj said, lots of mappers is a '1 hour a day ffa', nothing more (probably less). You guys could start by making some notes about what a good 1on1 map should include and what it shouldn't. If you also work closer to the mappers and beta test new maps with lots of feedback, you may get more good maps for 1on1 competitive play. Start a competion or something with some specific rules adjusted to your neads. Just a thought. |
|
|
|
|
| Of all those maps that you have downloaded, have you contacted the authors of any and tried discussing with them the strengths and weaknesses of their maps? The thing that irritates me about this issue, is the fact that hardcore quake players want mappers to cater to their needs. Yet when it comes to giving feedback about maps, these players are notoriously silent. I myself am a mapper(a pretty good one at that( http://www.thect.com/maps ) <--- my site) Yet never have I recieved an email from any type of hardcore gamer giving me an in depth critique of any of my maps. Mappers live and die for feedback, and when we are limited to just the opinions of a couple of review sites, we are also limited to the amount of ideas(technical, graphical, gameplay. etc) to implement in our next maps. So far the only emails I have recieved are along the lines of, COOL MAP MAN!, or just a reference to some odd technical glitch that is impossible to detect without noclipping through the map. So what I'm saying is that if gamers want mappers to cater to their needs, you have to actually email the mapper and let him know what you think, like, dislike. We aren't mind readers folks... |
|
|
|
|
| Of all those maps that you have downloaded, have you contacted the authors of any and tried discussing with them the strengths and weaknesses of their maps? The thing that irritates me about this issue, is the fact that hardcore quake players want mappers to cater to their needs. Yet when it comes to giving feedback about maps, these players are notoriously silent. I myself am a mapper(a pretty good one at that( http://www.thect.com/maps ) <--- my site) Yet never have I recieved an email from any type of hardcore gamer giving me an in depth critique of any of my maps. Mappers live and die for feedback, and when we are limited to just the opinions of a couple of review sites, we are also limited to the amount of ideas(technical, graphical, gameplay. etc) to implement in our next maps. So far the only emails I have recieved are along the lines of, COOL MAP MAN!, or just a reference to some odd technical glitch that is impossible to detect without noclipping through the map. So what I'm saying is that if gamers want mappers to cater to their needs, you have to actually email the mapper and let him know what you think, like, dislike. We aren't mind readers folks... |
|
|
|
|
It's interesting that this subject should finally be brought into the open like this. The mapping community has long wondered why competitive players never seem interested in trying out custom maps. Now the competitive players are wondering why the mappers aren't making maps for competitive play. Rather ironic, isn't it?
I really believe that all that is necessary to get the ball rolling in the right direction is some open communication. If you know of a mapper whose work you like, but just isn't suited for the kind of play you are looking for, email them! Let them know what it is you are looking for. I can tell you right now, I have NEVER received any sort of communication from a serious player asking if I could tailor a map to specific needs. About the only requests I get for maps are mods who are looking for mappers.
Talk to us people! Many of us (myself included) do level design for creative enjoyment. But we still like to see our creations enjoyed. And I can tell you right now, if I get several emails from people telling me what kinds of things they look for in a competitive map (and maybe even volunteer to do some playtesting to further the cause), I'm more than williong to listen. I enjoy challenging myself to try new things in mapping, and this is an area I'd love to work on. |
|
|
|
|
It's interesting that this subject should finally be brought into the open like this. The mapping community has long wondered why competitive players never seem interested in trying out custom maps. Now the competitive players are wondering why the mappers aren't making maps for competitive play. Rather ironic, isn't it?
I really believe that all that is necessary to get the ball rolling in the right direction is some open communication. If you know of a mapper whose work you like, but just isn't suited for the kind of play you are looking for, email them! Let them know what it is you are looking for. I can tell you right now, I have NEVER received any sort of communication from a serious player asking if I could tailor a map to specific needs. About the only requests I get for maps are mods who are looking for mappers.
Talk to us people! Many of us (myself included) do level design for creative enjoyment. But we still like to see our creations enjoyed. And I can tell you right now, if I get several emails from people telling me what kinds of things they look for in a competitive map (and maybe even volunteer to do some playtesting to further the cause), I'm more than williong to listen. I enjoy challenging myself to try new things in mapping, and this is an area I'd love to work on. |
|
|
|
|
I have started mapping for Quake III for the simple reason I can't stand Q3R. Well, that and I'm lazy.
Joking, the real reason is simply that no one plays my maps in the first place. At least on servers they don't. I have played my old XL1DM2 on like 2 servers, XL1DM3 once and thats the only times. If people would through up servers for custom map and sites for them, I'm sure more of us would do Quake III stuff. |
|
|
|
|
First I want to chime in briefly about the feedback thing... absolutely, absolutely true. When I tried to get testers for my CTF map it was like pulling teeth. In the end I got one (1) player from a competitive CTF clan to give me some feedback. And it was awesome! Imagine if I could have gotten a clan or two to actually playtest my map for a while. I never did get the playtesting I wanted, so in the end I just had to release the map, with a queasy sort of feeling that it might be crap.
If the DM map designers go through the same kind of stuff that I went through for weeks on end trying to get some sort of substantive feedback, then they have my sympathy. :-)
Next, about the mission pack having good team DM maps: I strongly suggest that you don't hold your breath for that. :-/
Finally: As for existing third-party DM maps, it's quite true that there are not many intended for duels (and that not many mappers are duellers themselves, I think, which is probably a significant observation). Of course, all the maps in Q1 and Q2 that people duelled on forever weren't really made for duels either... sometimes you do get lucky.
Cruising through my personal stash I came across the following set of maps which _might_ have 1-on-1 potential. A few may be a bit large, but then maps really "shrink" once you get to know them well, so I'm erring on the side of looks-too-big rather than looks-too-small. I don't play many duels myself so I'm not putting any sort of stamp of approval on them, just tossing them out there for more qualified folks to look at. BTW this is the same list I posted on the CPL Europe board, so if you already saw that you can stop reading now. :-)
- 69pickup1 (Coitus Interruptus)
- addict (Quake 3: Addiction)
- bal3dm1 (Ash Rain)
- dmmq3dm5a (Face to Fate v2)
- kaos (Khaooohs)
- nemesis (Nemesis Online)
- onenightdm (One Night Stand)
- q3jdm8a (Wicked)
- q3jdm9 (untitled)
- senndm2 (Falling Higher)
- ztn3dm1 (Blood Run)
- ztn3dm2 (BeatBox)
You know, if some good players took some of these maps for a test drive, not only might you actually find some new duel maps worth using, you might be able to generate some concrete, specific feedback about what map features you found to be good or bad for duelling.
|
|
|
|
|
There are custom maps servers, maybe not a lot, but at least a few. For example check here:
http://www.planetquake.com/lvl/server/default.asp
|
|
|
|
|
Ooops, sorry for the three consecutive posts, but I ran across this post in the Q3World level editing forum. This is Paul Jaquays (of id) talking about the mission pack: "This is not a deathmatch pack ... it's not even a TEAM deathmatch pack."
So there you have it.
|
|
|
|
|
I dedicated 2 months of my life to a Q3 1on1 map, hoping that the hardcore 1on1 community would adopt it. I realize now how silly that mentality was. I play Quake radically different from a hardcore player. Watching endless demos and studying accepted 1on1 maps didn't change that. I wasted my time, and I won't do it again.
If you want it done right, do it yourself. Wishing and hoping that other people will provide you with good maps won't get you anywhere.
You can start DOING something by frequenting http://www.planetquake.com/lvl/ and comment on GAMEPLAY issues for the maps listed there. What works, what doesn't, and what comes close. And be specific. Comments like "This map rocks!" or "This map makes me vomit" don't help.
Bleh. |
|
|
|
|
I dedicated 2 months of my life to a Q3 1on1 map, hoping that the hardcore 1on1 community would adopt it. I realize now how silly that mentality was. I play Quake radically different from a hardcore player. Watching endless demos and studying accepted 1on1 maps didn't change that. I wasted my time, and I won't do it again.
If you want it done right, do it yourself. Wishing and hoping that other people will provide you with good maps won't get you anywhere.
You can start DOING something by frequenting http://www.planetquake.com/lvl/ and comment on GAMEPLAY issues for the maps listed there. What works, what doesn't, and what comes close. And be specific. Comments like "This map rocks!" or "This map makes me vomit" don't help.
Bleh. |
|
|
|
|
I dedicated 2 months of my life to a Q3 1on1 map, hoping that the hardcore 1on1 community would adopt it. I realize now how silly that mentality was. I play Quake radically different from a hardcore player. Watching endless demos and studying accepted 1on1 maps didn't change that. I wasted my time, and I won't do it again.
If you want it done right, do it yourself. Wishing and hoping that other people will provide you with good maps won't get you anywhere.
You can start DOING something by frequenting http://www.planetquake.com/lvl/ and comment on GAMEPLAY issues for the maps listed there. What works, what doesn't, and what comes close. And be specific. Comments like "This map rocks!" or "This map makes me vomit" don't help.
Bleh. |
|
|
|
|
laerth = jealous of my consecutive-posts record! ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
First did anybody bother to look at "ButtRailer" you can find it at http://www.claudec.com/lair_of_quake_levels/ "Buttrailer has three one on one maps done in the classic RA style i.e you start our with what weapons you are going to get and there are no items to pick up. In this case the players start out with a railgun and more than enough ammo. There are three levels so if you dont like one maybe you will like another.
As for Beta testing. It's very hard to get good feedback. I have gotten things that didn't make sense, even from experienced mappers. They will say something vague about a texture misalignment, but no indication of where it is. I had a glaring error once and 8-12 people tested the level and no one noticed it. Giving good feedback is a lot of work. When I do it I make screenshots, number them and refer to them in my written feedback. I go through the level looking at everything.
Another major problem with beta testing, is group testing. You can get a few individuals here and there to test your map, but all they can do is play against the bots. Bots don't play like humans. A level with only bot opponents doesn't run at all like when there are only human opponents. Competative levels must be tested by humans not bots. So you have to get at least two or more people together at the same time, and have a server for them to play on. I had it nice for a while a guy named Joker who runs TKCS computers in CA, had a klan and a server. So he was able to give me a server and get a bunch of people on the server to test. Unfortunatly he had to disband the clan and take the server off line because of business related stuff:(
As for style guides. Yes there is an incredible dirth. I am planning on doing some research and possibly may write a style guide. I need to know if there is industry terminology for certain concepts. I think I will ask in the quake3world.com forum maybe one of the ID guys will be nice enough to answer.
It's kinda OT for this thread but I have two other papers I want to write one on a bit of history and gaming (I wish I had started this one since some industry guys are giving interviews on the future of gaming and my paper may give an intersting perspective for trying to figure out the future of gaming. (I may have an angle that has not been done before at least I have never seen it done:))
The other paper may never get done it requires at least a few if not many years of extensive research. But if anyone reading this happens to know of anyone or any organizations that are attempting to debunk the field of psychology please let me know:) |
|
|
|
|
I agree that over-emphasis on look versus gameplay has greatly affected the quality of 1-on-1 maps for Q3. I think one of the biggest issues is large architecture. Everything in Q3 is large and grand and impressive-looking, and designers need a lot of room for all that. This vastly affects how maps play, as all the maps turn out to be very similar, with large, open arenas separated by short hallways. Rarely if ever do you see really small, tight levels which lend themselves to good 1-on-1. Remember straining to hear pickup sounds that would give you clues as to the where your enemy had just spawned in? Even most of the Tourney maps are too large for you to do that.
I think the reasons for this are obvious, designers love their maps to have a good look. I'm guilty of this as well, but given the points made here maybe I'll try something a little more scaled back that focuses completely on 1-on-1 play.
I also agree that clip brushes are way over-used. :)
- Shade
|
|
|
|
|
I've almost finnished my 1 on 1 q3a map, it should be good fun to play.
Check out my site for updates www.planetquake.com/klzotr
-killazontherun |
|
|
|
|
I haven't touched a map editor for 5 month now because I was sick of all this crap... No one was offering and still no one is offering constructive feedback on my maps. I dont' think my q1 maps are all that bad, generally i'd say out of the newer maps those are the most accepted ones looking at better players over here in germay... Players like sk-kane & sk-griff duelled on my warfare map, warfare2 was played in 2 official 1on1 tournaments and clans like ibh (for the active qw scene - leading qw clan in germany) played my map warfare3 in the igl league as a 3rd teamplay map (eg first match map chosen by team1, second match map chosen by team2, 3rd match warfare3), but no one ever thought about sending feedback. NO ONE.
I just guess if the pro mod developers would offer their help for intensive betatesting etc I might try making some q3 duel maps although i'd have to learn the editor first.
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't touched a map editor for 5 month now because I was sick of all this crap... No one was offering and still no one is offering constructive feedback on my maps. I dont' think my q1 maps are all that bad, generally i'd say out of the newer maps those are the most accepted ones looking at better players over here in germay... Players like sk-kane & sk-griff duelled on my warfare map, warfare2 was played in 2 official 1on1 tournaments and clans like ibh (for the active qw scene - leading qw clan in germany) played my map warfare3 in the igl league as a 3rd teamplay map (eg first match map chosen by team1, second match map chosen by team2, 3rd match warfare3), but no one ever thought about sending feedback. NO ONE.
I just guess if the pro mod developers would offer their help for intensive betatesting etc I might try making some q3 duel maps although i'd have to learn the editor first.
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't touched a map editor for 5 month now because I was sick of all this crap... No one was offering and still no one is offering constructive feedback on my maps. I dont' think my q1 maps are all that bad, generally i'd say out of the newer maps those are the most accepted ones looking at better players over here in germay... Players like sk-kane & sk-griff duelled on my warfare map, warfare2 was played in 2 official 1on1 tournaments and clans like ibh (for the active qw scene - leading qw clan in germany) played my map warfare3 in the igl league as a 3rd teamplay map (eg first match map chosen by team1, second match map chosen by team2, 3rd match warfare3), but no one ever thought about sending feedback. NO ONE.
I just guess if the pro mod developers would offer their help for intensive betatesting etc I might try making some q3 duel maps although i'd have to learn the editor first.
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't touched a map editor for 5 month now because I was sick of all this crap... No one was offering and still no one is offering constructive feedback on my maps. I dont' think my q1 maps are all that bad, generally i'd say out of the newer maps those are the most accepted ones looking at better players over here in germay... Players like sk-kane & sk-griff duelled on my warfare map, warfare2 was played in 2 official 1on1 tournaments and clans like ibh (for the active qw scene - leading qw clan in germany) played my map warfare3 in the igl league as a 3rd teamplay map (eg first match map chosen by team1, second match map chosen by team2, 3rd match warfare3), but no one ever thought about sending feedback. NO ONE.
I just guess if the pro mod developers would offer their help for intensive betatesting etc I might try making some q3 duel maps although i'd have to learn the editor first.
|
|
|
|
|
...guess i'm the winner now :)
Your MsgBoard System seems kinda b0rked in NS... :( |
|
|
|
|
| Shade, you?re absolutely right! When I browse sites who reviews custom maps, all I see are maps with huuuuge open areas, simply sux.. And the reviewers seems to like them :P (old Q2ers i guess) |
|
|
|
|
If the Quake community doesn't tell us mappers what it likes or dislikes about our maps, how are we to know what maps people are going to enjoy playing?
As laerth, Mr CleaN and Maj have already said, the answer is in being PROACTIVE. I say to all those who are complaining about the "lack of decent" maps, don't sit there and whine about it, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!
Go to http://www.planetquake.com/lvl and start downloading maps and playtesting them. Tell the mappers what you do and don't like about their maps. BE POSITIVE and give DETAILED CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK.
Visit mappers sites and offer encouragement and suggestions. Most mappers I know would welcome ideas that will help them make better maps, myself included.
Mappers often spend MONTHS at a time investing HUNDREDS of hours producing maps and receive not so much as a SINGLE email of feedback, even after THOUSANDS of downloads.
We make maps for FUN, and if it ain't fun then we've got no reason to do it. The only reward for mappers is the satisfaction gained from making a map that looks good, plays great, and that we know people will ENJOY playing.
NO FEEDBACK = NO REWARD = NO MAPS
Quakers, the future is in your hands: SIEZE THE DAY !!
Snotman
www.planetquake.com/mapwerx
|
Add A Comment
|