First off, let me just say I'm really enjoying this little discussion. Since I found these Q3 communities (almost a year ago) I haven't been able to sustain too many subjective conversations about level design theory without someone taking offense or backing down for fear of offending me in some way. Sad, but true, because usually when a discussion arises, someone's baby is the subject
.
Sock, very interesting bouncer-less map. (So this is where the ik textures originated?) There were a lot of things I had to get used to, like looking up at the paths above me and accepting that I wouldn't be reaching them quickly. Other things that were odd included the item free streets (to get players onward and upward immediately), and that many of the building trims are actually major paths. Once I memorized the map, I had some fun, but I don't see it by any means as something I'd want to model my city by. Here's what I didn't like:
- Why anyone would spend so much time constructing such great Boston style buildings and textures only to have most of the gameplay stuck indoors is beyond me.
For me, city maps are ALL about the outdoor gameplay. That's what makes them so unique. Most of the gameplay in this map is cramped, boring indoor stair climbing that has been done in tons of other generic maps, and done way better. In my map, I want players in and out of the buildings
quickly. Not all climbing has to be done inside. This map doesn't take advantage of things like street elevation change (Goldrush) and balcony hops for variety.
- Given the time it takes to gain height, and the lack of weapons on the streets below, the penalty for falling is way too high.
Once I got up to the rooftops I didn't want to come down, but without much activity on the streets I was hurting myself by camping. I'd be interested to see this map tourney-sized, where the climb to the top is really rewarded by using your height advantage on a single person. Instead it's all about trying to get a quick kill on anyone who spawns in the streets, which is ultimately less effective than staying inside. I'd probably have a few more rooftop battles if I played with humans, but there's no denying that this is for the most part an indoor map.
- The indoor areas didn't seem very realistic or "alive" to me.
Most of them are just empty spaces + really strange staircases and a few paintings for decoration. I saw the occasional book case/treasure chest, but overall they didn't feel like they had much real world purpose.
- I've never liked a map that tried to conform to Q3A's (FUBAR) scale.
In city maps, it all seems to come back to window measurements. In this case, windows are about the size of doors and also touch the floor. Not very realistic, but this is ironically what has to be done to get proper heights without severe movement restrictions. The resulting gameplay is always claustrophobic, and personally I hate tight maps. Most battles are nothing but reflex tests and there is no room for skillful movement. I'd rather mess up my scale a bit than end up with a map this cramped indoors. Maybe I'm not going for total realism after all.
- Other thoughts:
I should also note that most successful city maps are war torn. Not just because most games take place in war torn settings, but also because it makes the connections between buildings much more believable. Want this building connected to its neighbor? Blow a hole in the wall! Want a drop down here? Cave in the floor! My map can't take these liberties, which could be hard to work around, but it is in my opinion more rewarding and realistic when it works.
Probably the most impressive thing for me was the map's r_speeds. 3k to 4k throughout the entire thing!!! This is one part of the design that I can really appreciate. Even the old computers won't break a sweat running this one.
---
Believe it or not, even though I don't plan on making a city map anything like this one, all this talk has gotten me really interested in the ultimate challenge of designing an open, vertical, mostly outdoor city map without "cheating" with bouncers, TPs or lifts. I might just put this alpha on hold for a while and try it! The crux of my vertical action is definitely going to be street elevation change. It seems like the best way to gain height quickly is to walk into a building on one side, and then drop the street level on the other side, instantly giving the windows on that side height. I think the lack of bouncers will really make things more tactical for TDM gameplay.
There are also some things I don't like about my map, specifically how several rooms have absolutely no water gameplay. With a map this big, I think you need a common gameplay element throughout, otherwise it just seems like 3 or 4 maps in one.
So I'm gonna try another layout I think. I'm not in a huge rush or anything. If PHDM_D is successful I'll post a new thread. If not, I'll probably just come back to this one and show you guys the improvements I've been making. One thing that's been helping me with this alpha is how I've been keeping my distance from it. I've only played a handful of games and it makes taking feedback a lot more natural - almost like it's someone else's map that people are criticizing.
Thanks for all your insight, I think it may have yet again raised my already demanding gameplay standards. I've been turning into quite the curmudgeon lately
.
-pat
. Trying to remove bouncers completely would almost mean starting over. I'm not sure how I'd get the vertical action I was looking for without them. Besides I've never had too much trouble with the suspended disbelief of bouncers. I consider them almost as much a part of Q3A as the items. I'm also not sure how lifts would be any better in that department.