|Posted by RickyT33 [22.214.171.124] on 2008/04/16 03:39:25|
|Hi everybody. It's time to voice your opinion of how much the Quake engine can be violated by modern hardware.
Also a usefull thing to do would be to quote your machine specs, so that we can see what we are up against if anyone makes a "hippopotamus-sized" level (not an un-optimized pig level, those are crappy IMHO)
(even though I've made and released several)
Points of argument could be reasons for not playing big levels (ones beyond standard Quake limits), what acceptable r_speeds levels are in modern engines or why you choose to build big levels that require custom engines.
Well People Do Play
skull, vio's map etc... but yeah it is limited.
But surely it can't hurt to throw in some DM spawnpoints? Base_debris, slave, and dragon.bsp apparently don't even have spawnpoints... I find this a bit weak, it doesn't cost much and players get more bang for the buck, so why ignore it? I like some botmatches now and then, and having more maps to choose from is nice.
bambuz: I know that, it was just the obvious reply to what speeds said. I'm well aware that it's a deathmatch icon (ferrari and all that), that's why I put in the effort :-) I don't care if anyone plays it, it just seems like the right thing to do.
I think "no DM support" should go on the list of bad practice (TM). The id maps have it, so it's practically a standard, and it's not hard to do.
I've never added DM support to any of my single player maps. They just don't work as DM maps generally. If you want a DM map, make a DM map. They are very different beasts.
id probably did it to expand the amount of content they were offering for sale. By doing that, they give the shareware version a bunch more life because people can DM on the maps as well.
The problem is that you then have to design your single player level with circular routes in mind and connections all over the place.
A valid question for a remake project though, since the id maps have lots of routes that aren't used or are just extra to explore in the SP version, ie. they're not blocked off.
Well, I think they did it because they all liked deathmatch and they had all those maps to play around with. They probably thought "why not". They were just playing friendly matches.
Some id1 maps work really well in TDM, like e1m2 and e3m7(?) can't remember... others are just fun...
runequake ppl love azure agony etc... I think what you mean is that they normally aren't good 1on1 maps.
Perhaps your standards for "good DM map" are too high. I was thinking more along the lines of "fun for a friendly match, or some bots."
I just checked a lot of maps, and apparently from the last year or two, most maps don't even have DM spawnpoints. Friendly exceptions are Neg!ke's amd Efdat's Zer maps, which look interesting enough for some bot fun.
It's so easy, why not toss in some info_player_deathmatch? I think it's clear that you can't expect too much. But it might be fun for a few loonies. And it shows that you care, and that you're willing to go the extra mile.
It's just one more thing that I don't get. It's cheap fun. Plus, technically, you have an error in your map (crash when deathmatch=1.)
What's wrong with amateur mappers following the same "more bang for buck" idea? We're not making money with this, but it's always good to give ppl more to play with.
And when making remix maps, you can always touch up the deathmatch a bit, remove the most glaring problems etc.
I might actually enlist the help of some DM playtesters. *makes note* I really think the maps would lose something if I dropped DM.
Yea Add Info_player_deathmatch And
mark the key doors as not in deathmatch and, if it's an episode map and there aren't many weapons, add a few only for dm.
I Started To
For warp, and there�s vestigal remains in there until I decided that nobody would bother for big maps, so stopped. Warpb is really the only one that has extra stuff.
I included alot of the broken / unusable teleports for this. If, as Spirit said on another thread the DM player community is smaller than the SP, then it was probably a good call.
I Just Always Forgot
i dont think there's a reason to put dm spawn
points for such giant maps like marcher or warpbcd people will never play 'em, but on the other hand why not put dm starts on smaller maps like resent dragon, etc
Most old, say, pre-1999 custom maps have DM support (however crude). It probably has to do with the way it was initially played. Back then, people generally weren't as skilled and determined when playing deathmatch. It was more about mindless fun and shooting people of the same low skill in familiar environments. Yes, I know there were already highly skilled players, QW and so on, but still. Even if a map sucked in terms of connectivity and layout, some people still got a bang out of it. I assume not much thought was put into the item placement in most cases, and if it was, it didn't require much additional effort.
Despite the fact that, indeed, hardly anyone will actually play newly released SP maps in DM, even if they have an appropriate size (which the warp maps have not, so not adding DM entities was ok). Nevertheless, I think it's kind of nice to have some sort of DM support simply for a sense of oldschoolness. My next map will have it too, even though it totally sucks for DM and I'm sure nobody will ever even consider having a match there.
Large maps can make interesting DM maps too if done properly. Certain (most) parts can be blocked off and new routes opened. A good recent example for this would be efdat's zerTM, as goldenboy already mentioned.
Plus, technically, you have an error in your map (crash when deathmatch=1.)Actually it's the engine's (or mod?) fault not to have any decent kind of error handling.
Deathmatch on SP maps is sometimes fun, we played neg!ke's zerst�rer map a bit and while it was not a great dm map, it was great fun.
What is much more important are coop playerstarts in my opinion (even though even less people play coop).
Yes, co-op starts seems reasonable to me although I wish id had included more tools for co-op play. Like additional spawn flags where you could have things appear only in a co-op game. That would have allowed a whole sub-genre of maps aimed at co-op players.
try the latest release of quoth as it contains a few enhancements for coop (including only in coop/not in coop flag support) as well as TONS of very significant time savers (especially for large maps with lots of spawning enemies) and optimisations. On top of that, there are the new monsters and other entities (including 2 weapons) you can use in your maps. Quoth is totally awesome.
The mapping docs for it are also really good, though there are a lot of currently undocumented features, such as the improvements to func_train, the func_button that can be attached to other func_entities etc.
As For Dm
Although I didn't used to bother with DM support, I think my old maps would have been ok in dm with enough players. I'm trying to at least put in spawns and hide doors etc. in my current maps and am going to include full dm support in my large base map as it contains a lot of underwater sections which might be quite novel in dm.
DM3RMX is currently the only rmx map I've seen to maintain dm support, although it is based on a dm map, so it would seem odd to omit it. I blocked off all the new areas and kept it fairly faithful to the original map.
coop support is a must for sp maps and is very little extra effort unless you have a lot of areas where the player gets trapped so you need to create teleporters etc. to help out.
It goes without saying that DM support means a bit more than placing DM starts and removing doors. A little thought should be given to the item placement and how movement can be improved, e.g. by creating DM-only teleporters and passages, or removing obstacle details. Of course, one has to consider benefits/disadvantages for the SP mode as it's the main focus of the map.
With Quoth2, proper coop support is quite possible indeed, and there are many ways in which it can be spiced up, like areas that can only be reached by working together (bunk-up). Regular coop always somewhat suffers from a lack of ammo or a fair distribution of it and the weapon-target bug - fortunately this can be dealth with now. The main problem are trap or 'one way' situations like than said. Some extra triggers or teleporters for the other players would have to be added.
I know Quoth makes co-op easy, but I was referring more to back in the day when Quake first came out and mapping was hot. That would have been the time to really capitalize on co-op but id didn't really provide decent tools for that. More of a half-hearted, "eh, here's some co-op player starts - have fun!"
Are you working on anything currently?
Youi mean you can mount a button on a moving train now?!?!?!?!
Nice That We Talked About It
e1m2qmx will retain the classic dm loadout 99% (all classic jumps etc will still work, too), the others might be adjusted a bit. I might ask some QW players for playtesting. I'll restrict Quoth use to SP. Talking about jumps, the usual speedrun goof (slope-GJ etc) will be exterminated :-)
Maybe I'll post some screenies at some point, haven't decided yet.
Ricky, I played slave a bit more. The fuse thing is nice, and could be taken even further. :^) Some nice machinery.
Sorry for taking this so far OT. Yes, down with r_speeds! :-E
yes, a few bits and bobs. The main thing is finishing the map I was going to include in the base pack before everyone decided it wasn't worth releasing together. That's not too far off - should be ready in the next month or so if I get time to work on it.
I also have a couple of other maps nearly done, including dm1rmx, which I will try and get done for the deadline of the remix pack and release alongside it - if not then I guess it will be soon after the base level.
I want to get these maps done before the summer kicks in because a. the weather is too good to be inside playing Quake and b. my computer overheats a lot in the summer :(
p.s. none of the maps have crazy r_speeds although they do go over 800 in places. The map sizes are quite big though. The basepack level is big and the other one (I guess apsp3) is huge, though they are both fairly small scale in terms of room size.
Some (but not much) info here: http://than.quaddicted.com/
your shots of dm1rmx look awesome. I've never sussed out myself how dm1 could work for SP, so I'm looking forward to seeing it.
But...please don't use that sky texture :/
Looking forward to those.
"APSP2 - Satan's Caramel Surprise"
Website copyright © 2002-2017 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.