Quake3World

Yeah it's official. If there were a level design religion, this would be one of the commandments.

Thou shalt not plan any area of your level around teleporters.

amirite?

I keep falling into this pit of thinking 'that dead area is okay, I'll just put a teleporter exit/entrance in there'. But if I let this happen I'd rapidly end up with a level with 10+ teleporters.

Or perhaps:

Teleporters should be planned into the layout as gameplay devices from the beginning, not used as a cheap fix for dead ends.

The main thing to base map layout on is still the items/powerups and the 'weight' they give to different areas. Teleporters should direct the flow between the areas and can provide cross-connectivity (and increase interactions between opponents). Putting a teleporter in a dead area could mean that it won't be used much (if it takes to long to there), but teleporters that are too easily accessible (2-way teleporters with teledest right in front of them) can cause too much teleporting. The distance from key routes in the map to teleporters defines accesibility, with which you need to balance how quickly players can intercept eachother. Then there is the 'spammability' of tele dests to take into account too. Complex stuff... :icon26:

That's not a bad one actually. But I like the ammendments stated so far.

If you're making a SP level and you feel like including DM in it, then it's ok to use teleporters in areas because it was designed for SP.

imho it's best to use as few teleporters in maps as possible, preferbly none.

Oeloe wrote:The main thing to base map layout on is still the items/powerups and the 'weight' they give to different areas.

So true! Although item placement can change in later design stages. It depends on which gametype what you design around. Usually around basic (gametype specific) design principles, of course taking item placement into account.

SonicClang wrote:If you're making a SP level and you feel like including DM in it, then it's ok to use teleporters in areas because it was designed for SP.

A SP map rarely ever makes a good MP map so converting a SP map to DM is madness, madness I tell you! Linearity in DM maps is bad.

Geit wrote:imho it's best to use as few teleporters in maps as possible, preferbly none.

As a CPMA fan, i don't agree. Hub3/cpm22 and many other maps could never be as exciting to play without teleporters. If you're careful, you can get away with as much as 5 teles (like hub) without making things confusing.

Oeloe wrote:

Geit wrote:imho it's best to use as few teleporters in maps as possible, preferbly none.

As a CPMA fan, i don't agree. Hub3/cpm22 could never be as exciting to play without teleporters.

They're hard to place though, they more easily break the flow than add to the gameplay.

It probably takes quite lot of experience (like guys like swelt have).

Oeloe wrote:

Geit wrote:imho it's best to use as few teleporters in maps as possible, preferbly none.

As a CPMA fan, i don't agree. Hub3/cpm22 and many other maps could never be as exciting to play without teleporters. If you're careful, you can get away with as much as 5 teles (like hub) without making things confusing.

Well, the thing is, aerowalk *is* confusing for new players due to all the teles. I know it was confusing for me at first. Also, I've seen Preacher (the original maker of aerowalk) say that one should use as few teles as possible, only inserting them if you have to.

It seems that recently tp's have been being abused more and more in maps. They CAN be implemented very well, and improve game flow, but when they are thrown in out of laziness (ie, not wanting to take the time to think of a more effective solution) they rarely work. However, I do see jpads being abused in the same way as well - a map with 8 jpads is just as lame as a map with 5 teles (aerowalk is excluded of course).

Some of my rules of tp placement include,
a) have the TP exit in the same general area as the tp, so its not just an easy escape route
b) dont allow the tp to take a player to a significantly advantageous position
c) dont add a tp when there is an alternate solution, even if it requires more work.

oh yeah, and aerowalk IS confusing - very much so in fact - the first few times you play it. Thats why you invest some time into learning a map. It bugs me when ppl play a map for 5 minutes and bitch about it being confusing. But thats a whole different discussion

StormShadow wrote: Some of my rules of tp placement include,
a) have the TP exit in the same general area as the tp, so its not just an easy escape route
b) dont allow the tp to take a player to a significantly advantageous position
c) dont add a tp when there is an alternate solution, even if it requires more work.

Hear hear, quite agree!

Btw, has anyone ever seen someone camping the little ledge where the tele exit is above GL (the ledge you doublejump to prevent falling to GL and to get to RG) to pummel an opponent? Just occured to me that that's possible at hub3.

And i can finally do the stairjumps (in cpm) at hub and cpm22 too! <o/

Oh they are taller? Yea I'd have to agree with that, I find that having one teleporter at the top of the big room, then the exit/return tele in a smaller room, with 3 exits to it seems to work, it makes it so the bigger battles can be moved from room to room, and also makes for some great "running from that guy who rails you nomatter what"

riddla wrote:The next rule should be not to convert Q3 maps directly from the bsp since Q4 player models are taller. (23 units or something of the sort)

Q3DM6 was an unfortunately example, as the doorways were unusually cramped for Q4. A better example of where it can work is DM7 - converting that to Q4 looks fine, it only needs a minor adjustment to the 2 basement doorways.

Grudge wrote:Or perhaps:

Teleporters should be planned into the layout as gameplay devices from the beginning, not used as a cheap fix for dead ends.

Yeah, what he said.

It's not so much even that they have to be planned from the beginning, but the "Oh, this sucks, I'll throw in a tele." reflex is what mappers need to avoid.

Hell, teleporters can be added last-minute and work, it's just using them as an enhancement as opposed to a fix that's the important point. (And the line between those two gets blurred sometimes, so it's not as cut-and-dried as that sounds...)

wviperw wrote:Well, the thing is, aerowalk *is* confusing for new players due to all the teles.

Not just new players. I've been playing aerowalk and its reincarnations since Q1/QW ('96?) and I still manage to take the wrong tele occasionally. Heaps of teleporters can work though, e.g. cpm3.

Generally I hate teleporters because they make it harder to learn new layout while playing with bots at 1st run or so as well as make things confusing.
Oh, more ofthen than not they look quite workaournd-ish.

a13n wrote:Generally I hate teleporters because they make it harder to learn new layout while playing with bots at 1st run or so as well as make things confusing.

Nah, all you to know is the tele exit places and orientation. At hub3: one two-way tele at RL-RG, two teles that simply take you one level up (GL and far SG) and one tele that takes you to the GL ledge. It's only on the last one that you have to get used to doublejump and move to the right to RG. The first three teles are easy.

Oeloe wrote:

a13n wrote:Generally I hate teleporters because they make it harder to learn new layout while playing with bots at 1st run or so as well as make things confusing.

Nah, all you to know is the tele exit places and orientation. At hub3: one two-way tele at RL-RG, two teles that simply take you one level up (GL and far SG) and one tele that takes you to the GL ledge. It's only on the last one that you have to get used to doublejump and move to the right to RG. The first three teles are easy.

:bump:

What's the first run worth anyway? Go play q3dm1. :P

Teleports confusing? Prey's portal ftw! Done in "Q4"
Actually seeing the other side of tp could destroy the gameplay even more (especially if the tele is one-sided). I think "Painkiller" had good system: there was a cubemap that showed you the destination area so you always knew where you will land. But because it wasn't realtime you couldn't see other players or even an items through the tele. Oh, and you could rj through the tele. That was sweet :icon26:

someone should write a '10 commandments of level design' and post it somewhere

Oeloe wrote:hub3

And by that, i guess you mean hub3aeroq3 rather than hub3tourney1 or hub3aeroq3a ?

Why aren't there more threads like this? (discussing actual gameplay in level design)