A level design YouTube channel idea I have.

[AEon]

QuArK was the one that let you group brushes, I really liked it back then before GTKradiant. Differing from Qoole it actually let you properly rotate brushwork, Qoole tended to crash. Actually registered QuArK and Qoole .

Worldcraft became Hammer, and I really hated Worldcraft... again back then in the Quake II mapping times.

[Castle]

No id Tech 5? Seems more useful than speculating about id Tech 6, which hasn't even been announced yet.

Oh also, QOOLE is another Q1/Q2 level editor. It was kinda shitty but had some interesting features nonetheless.

At this point in time I am questioning myself to even include modern pure idtech. I know that's a travesty on my levels especially considering where I am saying this but Id sadly has not been able to keep up with Epic, Crytech, Dice or Valve. It would likely be a better idea for me to replace idtech with the modern engine Titanfall is running now that i think about it.

I can add QOOLE to the list!

[Castle]

QuArK was the one that let you group brushes, I really liked it back then before GTKradiant. Differing from Qoole is actually let you properly rotate brushwork, Qoole tended to crash. Actually registered QuArK and Qoole .

Worldcraft became Hammer, and I really hated Worldcraft... again back then in the Quake II mapping times.

One of the things that sticks out between WorldCraft and Hammer is that, compared to all other editors, they have barely changed! There are differences yes, but they are typically subtle in nature in most cases. Worldcraft to Hammer is like a time capsule. lol

[Eraser]

QOOLE was a bit funny in that it saved maps in its own file format, with coordinates as float numbers. When converting to .map format at compile time, these coordinates were converted to ints, which could lead to leaks due to rounding errors. Occurred with rotating geometry and such.

[Castle]

QOOLE was a bit funny in that it saved maps in its own file format, with coordinates as float numbers. When converting to .map format at compile time, these coordinates were converted to ints, which could lead to leaks due to rounding errors. Occurred with rotating geometry and such.

I wonder if this has been fixed at all. XD

[Castle]

Just a heads up, i just uploaded the latest and final video that shows the art phase of my TF2 CTF map.

You can check it out here http://youtu.be/yLBRL4VQ7B4

enjoy!

[AEon]

After having watched the other TF2 videos, I felt the map was pretty much there, even in texture. That you actually went in an completely redid textures and most of the models, was somewhat of a shock. Funny to see the yellow "caulk" textures TF2 uses.

Personally I don't like TF2 as a game, but I love the levels, textures, models and the design. Many of your small details, adding extra brushes along the ceiling edges, grates, windows, rooftops, the whole canyon at the base of the damn, the windows into closed off areas, all the nifty rock (especially the roundish rock view up), are all quite inspirational... just reminding everyone that such relatively simple details can make the map look so much nicer.

I felt that a few areas in the corridors could use a bit more detail, e.g. the floors just had one texture and looked flat, maybe adding some more "patching up" (like repaired areas) might look nice. Some other areas, IIRC, the bases could use slightly more models, and the central area between the trucks looked empty in comparison as well.

I have to admit the mirroring of the map is a real nightmare in TF2, without a mirror tool or add-on, that would really drive me nuts.

The mesh manipulation, watching you do that, was really interesting. And that you can apparently paint blending is also quite nifty.

Anyway good job.

Hmmm... going back to *really* old engines, i.e. Wolfenstein, I am not quite sure how instructive that actually is. Personally, I'd probably only go back to about Duke Nuk'em 3D, since that was the last and most modern of 2.5D engine back then. Never built anything for Wolfenstein (did not even play it), so it would still be interesting though.

[Castle]

After having watched the other TF2 videos, I felt the map was pretty much there, even in texture. That you actually went in an completely redid textures and most of the models, was somewhat of a shock. Funny to see the yellow "caulk" textures TF2 uses.

Yeah, its almost like they have quake 3 mappers in their ranks who one day got upset at the lack of caulk lol

I felt that a few areas in the corridors could use a bit more detail, e.g. the floors just had one texture and looked flat, maybe adding some more "patching up" (like repaired areas) might look nice. Some other areas, IIRC, the bases could use slightly more models, and the central area between the trucks looked empty in comparison as well.

This point here brings up something that has been mentioned a few times about Valves ideal mapping methodology. Its called density of detail.
http://www.nodraw.net/2010/08/tf2-density-of-detailing/

Its possible I have not thought about the detail in this level with Valves mindset. What is worth noting about this is that i find this to be somewhat unique to TF2 as CS:GO, COD and Quake all tend to aim for a uniform detail density. Its an interesting topic I think!

I have to admit the mirroring of the map is a real nightmare in TF2, without a mirror tool or add-on, that would really drive me nuts.

Its bad but it didn't feel Team Arena terrain out of brushes bad to me.

The mesh manipulation, watching you do that, was really interesting. And that you can apparently paint blending is also quite nifty.

IMHO its the industry leading method for creating organic geometry out of brushes.

Anyway good job.

Thanks!

Hmmm... going back to *really* old engines, i.e. Wolfenstein, I am not quite sure how instructive that actually is. Personally, I'd probably only go back to about Duke Nuk'em 3D, since that was the last and most modern of 2.5D engine back then. Never built anything for Wolfenstein (did not even play it), so it would still be interesting though.

The nice thing is it will be short and to the point for a change. My goal is to show the fundamentals of level design by showing the evolution of the FPS. One map for each game!!

[Eraser]

lol, I created entire Wolf3D episodes with custom levels, custom graphics and custom sound effects. All was unfortunately lost in a freak harddrive accident

[AEon]

Castle,
on the uniformity of detail density... thinking about it a bit, I seem to have gone the typical Q3A way of uniform density everywhere. Though I do try to have areas of special interest. This might have to do with trying to get a consistent frame rate throughout the map.

I just read the link you posted, and I would imagine the bases, where all the action takes place have the lowest frame rate of the whole map. This is actually really bad, especially with many player models also in view. And all the trivial corridors are way too "fluid" FPS-wise. I think Valve gets away with this kind of mapping because the hardware has become so fast, that it simply does not matter any longer.

Don't get me wrong, the concept of adding detail to gameplay important areas is a good one, never thought about it much, so quite instructive... it is also efficient: put the most effort into what gets looked at the most... a staple of Half-Life 2 design.

So in the case of your map, you "should" be adding more detail to the bases, i.e. detail at all entry points to paths, and even less in the central yard... at least according to that article... hmm...

[Eraser]

I just read the link you posted, and I would imagine the bases, where all the action takes place have the lowest frame rate of the whole map.

You could also see it the other way around: have a target framerate you want hit throughout the map (on a certain piece of reference hardware), make sure the most detail heavy locations hit this mark and less important locations can be less detailed. The framerate in those places might increase, but that's not a bad thing, is it?