News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register | Log in
Vertical Map Competition
This is the thread for the new mapping event being discussed.

UPDATE: Here are the rules for the event:
* All entities/brushfaces inside 768x768
* No teleporting the player
* Deadline july 14 (extended from june 30)
* Single-player
* Playable in Quoth
First | Previous | Next | Last
Link To Previous Discussion 
Could The 512� Playable... 
...area shift on different vertical levels? That is to say, if there is one 512� room on top of another, do they have to line up on the x and z axis, or could they overlap, just so long as it doesn't allow the player any more than 512*512 horizontal movement space at any one time?

How about non-playable area? I assume there could be some detailing through a window that isn't part of the 512� playable area... 
 
yes, they have to line up for the sake of consistency. areas outside of the 512� field are allowed of course, as long as the player can't reach them. those could also be used for monsters. 
1024� FTW! 
The 512� idea sounds good to me, I might even join in on the fun. I would recommend extending it to 1024�, though. 512� might be a tad to cramped.

One question: Standard Quake, Quoth, something else? 
768x768! 
The golden middle path! 
1024... 
I was worried that 1024 might be so big that it wouldn't be much of a restriction... but I guess for a sizable SP map, it might be.

There's also 768�... 
 
i want to participate! 
Hrm 
I like the idea posted in the speedmapping thread: one texture 
Volume! 
How about 1024 High x 512 Wide x 512 Deep?

The textures could also be limited to anything non-Base due to the upcoming Base pack. 
Well... 
if we limit the height then that works against the idea of making vertical maps...

What we want is a rule or set of rules that, by restricting one aspect of the map building, encourages people to go another direction in creative ways, and take it as far as they want in that direction. So if we want to encourage vertical maps, we restrict the horizontal, and leave the vertical free.

Same with the "use each entity at least once" idea... we wouldn't restrict people to use each ONLY once because the goal was to explore using underused entities... if we stop you at 1 each, then we're stopping the very thing we were trying to encourage, which is more use of those entities! 
 
'Use each entity at least once' interests me. Does that include every monster/item? What about undocumented entities from the progs? IIRC any function can be called as a spawn function which would be somewhat impractical. Maybe restrict it to all the entities that have a 'QUAKE-ED' comment in the source. 
Question... 
if i make a circular tower does it still need to fit within 512x512 or can I make it occupy the same area as a 512x512 square floor would? (i.e 512x512 = PIxR^2 of the circle)

If not it seems we are limited by shape if we want a reasonable floor.

Also, are there any rules as to which way the player should travel in the tower. Down is just as legal as up, right? 
Also... 
The areas outside the main floorspace can hold monsters right? By this I mean monsters that could be attacking the player from a distance such as vores, scrags or ogres. Is this ok, or do we need to put all enemies inside the main 512x512 area? 
 
Personally I think that every entity and visible brushface should fit inside the square footprint of 512� or 768� or 1024� area. And we should pick the dimensions that feel appropriate for that. 
 
I don't think "use every entity" is a good idea.
Do you really want to force mappers to use those rarely seen entities like info_null, info_player_start2, event_lightning and light_fluorospark? Which raises another issue - some entities are theme oriented, like tech sounds versus walltorches. Would that really inspire interesting maps, or just make a mess?

I suggested "use very monster once" because most mappers will have used all of the monsters at least once in some map or other and they will already have some idea how to use them. Limiting it to one of each monster leaves a map population of 13 - small but sufficient for a speedmap - and focuses the mapper's attention more on how to get the most out of each one, instead of struggling to cram them in arbitrarily. Which is what "use every entity" would entail. 
Omus: 
I was assuming we'd use everything with a /*QUAKED */ comment. 
Re: Vertical Theme 
I agree that everything - surfaces and entities - should remian within a footprint of the agreed dimensions.

The size I think depends on how long and involved a project is desired. 512� is good for a one day speedmap. But if you also want to ommit the use of teleporters ( a good idea imo ) then you must allow space for stairs, plats etc. Your mental image of a 512� map probably starts with a room of that size. It's not a bad size for a quake combat. But then to expand the map requires just stacking several such rooms on top of each other, like an office block. Not very good. The limit should allow mappers to also make something smaller than the size limit where appropriate, like narrow shafts for the player to fall through, or spiral stairs.
For a longer, more involved project then I'd say 1024� is better. 
Re: Quoth 
For the "use every monster" theme, obviously having a bestiary twice as large makes for a bigger demand on the mapper. Depends ultimately on the timelimit - speed or turtle?

For anything else, I'd advise using Quoth if, for no other reason - the monster spawning. It really makes things much easier.

And besides, if your intention is to encourage innovative mapping, wouldn't the expanded yet relatively new content of Quoth only help that? 
Addendum 
And you realise, if the vertical theme is the chosen at least one map will be named "The Downward Spiral"..? 
Vertical 512x512, Non-base, Quoth 
not every monster, I hate grunt and the usual "base stuff at the start or the end" is just over used... :P
For a timelimit I would say one month.

However, whatever is chosen in the end, I will totally donate one of my runes again for the "winner" (if one is chosen). 
Thoughts 
I'm for a 512u^2 floor size because if mappers uses the whole grid height available with that kind of footprint, the maps will really feel like towers. I think 1024^2 is a bit wide.

However, I think it would be nice to be able to have some areas a little bit larger, for example if we wanted to put stairs on the outside of the tower or have a balcony of some kind outside of the main floorspace.

As for using each type of entity at least once, well I'm not to keen on that for the reasons kell states. I want to give my map a theme and don't want to be forced to include grunts or fish etc. 
Than 
I appreciate that the limit cannot be too open without becoming pointless, but:

stairs on the outside of the tower or have a balcony of some kind outside of the main floorspace.

is exactly the sort of thing that needs to be kept inside the horizontal footprint and why I think there needs to be a bit more room than 512�. If you allow 'some features' to be built beyond the footprint you're circumventing it even more than just expanding it out to 1024�.

Also:

the maps will really feel like towers

is an assumption. Maybe some mappers don't want to build a tower. Just because the theme is "vertical" doesn't mean the result has to be "tower."

The purpose of having a theme is to encourage mappers to build differently from what they would normally build, not to encourage them to build the same as everyone else.

If you introduce rules to try to ensure quality by excluding bad design ideas, all you're really going to achieve is discouraging some ( proabably most ) people entering in the first place. You have to accept that different mappers must be able to interpret the theme differently, even if some of those interpretations end up sucking.

I suggested 1024� to accomadate greater interpretation and variety from the theme, including but not limited to such things as your tower's stairs and balconies. 
Kell: 
Do you really want to force mappers to use those rarely seen entities like info_null, info_player_start2, event_lightning and light_fluorospark? Which raises another issue - some entities are theme oriented, like tech sounds versus walltorches. Would that really inspire interesting maps, or just make a mess?

Actually, I really would want to make people use all the entities. I know some of them might not fit the level in an obvious way, which is why I think it's interesting. What's a light_flourospark doing in a castle? In the quake universe, I can think of all sorts of reasons. Some electrical generator buried in the catacombs by ancient technologists?

info_player_start2, func_episodegate, and info_deathmatch, and a few others were going to be excluded simply becuase they didn't make any sense in a single SP map. 
Time Limit Question 
before we talk about that any further, maybe we should settle on what sort of event we're talking about. People have said "speedmap," "turtlemap," and "one month."

Personally I like the idea of a 1-2 month event becuase I like playing high quality maps more than low quality maps. The only reason to do a shorter time would be if it meant more people would participate.

I think we should decide because some of the ideas being tossed about seem dependent on the length of the event. 
Time 
I reckon 1 month. More than that, and you're getting into serious commitment, map ideas that burgeon into epics, and increasingly likely delays.

What's a light_flourospark doing in a castle? In the quake universe, I can think of all sorts of reasons. Some electrical generator buried in the catacombs by ancient technologists?

Yes I totally agree that such ideas and thinking are cool. Primary reason I like Quake more than other games.
But that ingenuity is going to be required for all the other entities after that, which seems too laborious to yield proper inspiration.

In the case of 'technological disparity' like your generator idea, you could have a theme "base map powercut" where the setting is futuristic but the twist is to disallow anything that would require electricity. Working lights, pneumatic doors etc. Using candles to illuminate vent shafts a la Alien� Some ideas already occur. But there is a variety of response to the theme, different questions raised as well as different answers.
My point is: your requirement seems too specific.

However, you have made me think a bit more.

What I suggest is that you post a list of all the entities you propose for the theme. That will help everyone clarify their thinking on the idea. 
First | Previous | Next | Last
You must be logged in to post in this thread.
Website copyright © 2002-2020 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.