News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register | Log in
What Is Right With Quake Mapping In 2017?
1. Loads of great maps.

2. The full spectrum of mapping covered from the smallest vanilla Jam maps to the largest AD maps.

3. Loads of new mappers appearing out of nowhere.

4. Lots of hype still after 20 years.

5. Mappers doing interesting mapping streams for inspiration and interaction.

6. Mods like AD opening up a variety of mapping potential.

7. Mappers are generally great at using enhancements like fog, coloured lighting, skyboxes, rather than abusing them.

8. Custom engines have settled down to be stable and functional and work well as modern Quake.

9. Often a pleasing focus on exploring and secrets.

10. *insert yours here*


The one improvement I'd like to see is for mappers to realise that good, but small / non-epic / imperfect maps / scraps are still worth finishing off and releasing, whether they're simple vanilla maps or sock tormenting us with an unreleased striking castle vista. I'm sure a lot of these things can be fixed up to be worthwhile, and even if they weren't as good as the mapper intended, they will still be cool to play and explore.
8====D ~ ~ (_O_) 
10. *insert yours here* 
Shambler's OP 
No But Seriously Tho 
I'm surprised there actually has been an influx of new people here the past few years. That's nice I guess. Not dying is nice. 
Let's fill this thread with friendship and joy. 
I Love To Be Not In Complete Anguish And Despair. 
Would Be Interesting To Know 
What has brought all these new folks into quake mapping?
It's not like quake has been given the same kind of journalist exposure of Doom (for instance Brutal Doom had put a huge spotlight on that game) 
Sprony's Article 
On MapCore. That's where I saw the first screenshots of AD and I was blown away. 
Sprony's Article 
On MapCore. That's where I saw the first screenshots of AD and I was blown away. 
I Swear I Only Clicked Submit Once 
One of the reason why I entered this fandom was, because of one horror game project. I wanted to find the easiest 3d mapping editor, which was firstly cube 2: sauerbraten's level editor.. soon I figured I need more, then I find Trenchbroom. And I have been using it ever since. Thanks to that editor and creator(s), it is fun to map maps for Quake 1. J.A.C.K editor is very good as well* 
I Think Carmacks TB Tweet Helped A Lot 
I was already in the community before TB was released, I just converted to it pretty quickly. I had a few maps in development using WC at that point but have since been lost to reformatting. 
Come To Think Of It 
I just happened to feel like playing Quake last year. I thought to myself it would be really cool to try to make maps for it.

I never made maps before or opened an editor (except Serious Sam when I was like 13.) but I found TrenchBroom approachable. I tried to use radiant a few years back but got intimidated and didn't want to put forth the learning curve efforts.

So I would say it is because of TrenchBroom is why I am mapping and is one thing that is good about 2017 Quake! 
i played czg's insomnia and travail years ago, but nothing more.

then i saw quaddicted. i downloaded a lot of maps with five stars and ended playing almost none. lol. i got swamped with maps.

but then, after several months i started seeking maps with lots of comments and votes.
i started playing in october 2016. rrp, than's maps, czg's maps, tronyn's maps several one maps

i also saw arcane dimensions and bookmarked them for later. it's cool that good old quake gets some coverage

then in december played arcane dimensions. it's just too awesome, and made me apreciate quake even more. i'm not playing any other game since october.

so what brought me in? the sheer awesomeness of ad, rrp and other maps. trenchbroom is easy and welcoming for noobs too. also i was bored :wink: with modern fps and modern games. 
I think AD was a huge incentive for new people to map. 
Some random positivity:

The Episode Jam is a great idea. I was thinking about posting some boosterism in that thread, but probably the thread would be better left for the contributors.

The Quake mapping scene has kind of settled in around jams or standalone polished gems for "normal" releases, and giant epic maps for the big ticket items. Those are all great! But I also enjoy the good points of an episode/sequence of maps: a sense of progression (stylistic or mechanical), and regular moments of closure where the exploration-tree gets pruned off and restarted. Even just flowing smoothly from one map to the next, rather than being thrown back to a hub, is a small nice thing.

Obviously making a large-scale episode like Beyond Belief or Zer or whatever is a humongous endeavor and I'm not surprised that old Quake hobbyists steer away from that sort of thing, especially as a solo project. The Episode Jam is a neat way to attack this, it's cool to see it getting traction, and just for my own selfish benefit I'd sure like to see it stick the landing.

(And DOPA was pretty great.) 
in general: I just wanted to make a map that could look equivalent to a classic Id level.

personal: the supply of such an amount of good maps make it hard to choose. Mapping or playing. 
I think all these mapping Jams have definitely contributed a lot to recent interest for Quake mapping (or otherwise), encouraging new releases through collaboration and helps showcase an active mapping scene with regular results, which looks very attractive at enticing others to get involved in the scene. 
What #18 Says 
plus i think computers have gotten a lot faster, so qbsp + fullvis isn't a hurdle anymore(for detailed/large maps). it is easier now to make a quake map than ever before. 
RE: Fifth 
I played Quake when I was a kid (I'm 25), and while I was aware of the mission packs, I didn't know about custom mapping scenes or editors. In any case I was obsessed with tinkering with another (2D) game. In 2013 I was feeling nostalgic and wanted to replay Quake, so I went online to find a way to run it on my MacBook and found I was so impressed by the screenshots I saw I knew I had to play these maps instead! Then last year I decided it was time to start mapping myself. 
I found Daz's Custom Gamer channel and the way he discussed level design for Quake inspired me to switch from multiplayer stuff for Sauerbraten to Quake SP. I had played Quake on and off for a long time before then - it had been in my steam library for a long time at that point, and before then I had occasionally visited the permanent Quake LAN at ACMI in Melbourne (Australia, not Florida...), Which only ever had about 2-3 working machines out of the 4 available but was still great fun with friends.

TB was a big help actually getting into mapping for Quake though... I'm raised on WYISWYG tools and have struggled to get into orthographic editors, which still annoys me but I guess I'm just not wired for it.

Also, definitely agree that the focus and hype recently has been pointed to "epic" maps, which is understandable. It would be nice to see some shorter stuff, but that seems to be what the jams are for at this point. They tend to hit around that 15 minute mark that people like. 
I Got Here Because Of Daz Aswell 
The first thing I watched was Mapjam 2 ikblue/white.
Thats why my first map I'm currently working on uses ikwhite.

pls make more custom gamer!!! Come on Daz!!!
I guess you moved on in life... 
Got There By Looking For Quake 1 Communities 
Back in 2012 I decided to buy Quake 1 for just 10 bucks, thinking t would be a simple game, and boy was I wrong, it became one of my favourite game.
After playing the expansions (SoA>DoE) I went around looking for more stuff related to Quake, got interested in modding first (first it was sound replacements and now Schlossherr), then in mapping after.
I was really surprised Q1 had a community that big (and I still am, lol), because when people talk about Quake, they always think about Quake 3, and even then it's niche. I'm glad it does because this gem is getting the love it deserves, and I have people to talk about the game and design stuff.

Keep on going!! 
Daz Has A Lot To Answer For :D 
Found Out About Quake Modding Because Of Daz As Well. 
His videos are interesting to watch since he takes the time to analyze and share his opinions on the maps he plays. I wish he made more videos though. 
make more videos, use one of your alter egos if necessary. 
Engines And Tools 
It was really Trenchbroom that got me re-addicted to mapping. It's not that Hammer and other editors aren't great. TB just reminded me a bit of mapping in the original DOS version Quest for some reason and that's the editor I started with in '97. I've tried nearly every editor since then. TB is really the key for me in 2017.

Then of course, the old reliable community here at Func helps a lot. It's never a dull moment here.

But Quake mapping would not be what it is today without the spark of life the source ports give to the game. You have to be able to play the game on modern PCs reliably and we really owe a debt to the dedicated devs of Quakespasm, Mark V, Darkplaces et al.

And last but not least, the tools coders. Thanks to ericw and others for adding modern features to the compilers even while constrained by 20 year old tech. 
I'll Tell You What's Right About Quake Mapping In 2017. 
The state of the tools.

5 years ago we didn't have Trenchbroom or TyrUtils. Mapping was slow, vis was extremely slow, and light was rudimentary at best.

I think the progress of the past few years is owed to SleepwalkR, Tyrann and ericw just as much as it is owed to the talents of the mappers.

The barrier of entry has been lowered and it pays off massively. 
Anyone care to give me the bullet points on how Trenchbroom mapping is supposedly faster than - say - NetRadiant? I've spent enough time in both editors and I'm at a loss as to why people would think radiant-based editing is slower. Not trolling, I'd just really like to know what I'm missing here... 
+1 For Daz And TrenchBroom/Sleepwalkr 
Daz shared TB on /r/Quake. Downloaded it and it sat on my hard drive for a few years.

Got inspired last year annnnnd here we are.

TrenchBroom answered a lot of desires I had while using Hammer and Quark.

Beyond TrenchBrooms method of building brushes in the 3D view, the lack of an over-complicated UI was a huge help as well. (ahem Quark)

All those buttons staring you in the face(Hammer/Quark) make you feel as though youre missing out on some utility if you dont use em.

Watched mostly all of Daz's videos with commentary to catch up on years of mapping and absorbed a lot of his opinions peoples maps. 
It's a matter of preference really, but when I was using Radiant I felt like I was chopping wood with a blunt axe while holding oven mitts. 
Can You Elaborate? 
Which operations did you find clunky? 
No I Can't. 
I prefer TB end of story. 
I think it's safe to say that Trenchbroom's editing is pretty simple and straightforward, you can draw brushes in the 3D window, but it still offers plenty of 2D editing window options so you can draw brushes on that as well. It's probably the most user friendly Quake editor out there IMHO. 
I Don't Understand TB 
It just doesn't click for me. I definitely don't think it's the easiest editor to pick up. 
I am in agreement with OTP here. I never managed to get competent with Radient but I used Worldcraft for a bit before switching over to TB.

TB is an excellent WYSIWYG editor. I feel more like I am drawing or sculpting with it. I dont feel constrained to looking at orthographic views, I just place something in the 3d space and then I can manipulate it how I need it to look.
I can't think in 2d terms and translate it to 3d, it's just easier somehow to work entirely in 3d.
Of course this presents its own challenges, you have to figure out in advance how everything fits together otherwise you'll paint yourself into a corner pretty quick.

Hope this does a decent job of explaining. 
Are you still using TB1 by chance?

TB1 as in the version with ONLY 3D view? 
I often go back to TB1 because I prefer working in 3d only. Something about TB1 seems pure? I started working in TB2 recently to get used to it and I feel the UI has become a little confused. Or maybe I am confused. 
I've used both, TB2 more. Maybe I should try it again, but the majority of mapping I've done has been in the Source engine with Hammer so JACK naturally makes more sense to me. 
I'm starting to get a feeling then it's more to do with one's personal experience with manipulating things in 3d vs 2d, and not how much time / how many key presses it takes to do a certain operation. 
I can't help but think some editors must have objective advantages over others, it can't all be personal preference. I find JACK's/Hammer's texture browser/application utilities to be a lot better than every other editor I've tried, for example. 
Kinn Response Part 80 
I think you are right in saying that the overall flow of things is not that much faster if you are used to one or the other. The difference for me was the initial approach-ability of TB. an all 3D view and simplistic UI helped me get used to mapping in general.

I actually tried one of the radients after using TB and although I could make rooms, I found it to be a much more tedious process. If I used another editor for a good while I am sure it would be just as fast as TB.

Hope that makes sense. 
I've been mapping with Hammer for almost a decade, but once I tried TB I didn't look back. It's so much faster to create brushwork with it. I also find Radiant clunky as well personally and intensely dislike it. 
Simple Question... Simple Answer.. 
Bear In Mind 
"Radiant" is a group of about a million different variations of an editor, some of which are objectively old, shit and clunky. I'm really referring to the latest version of NetRadiant. 
To Clarify 
I was using the oft-derided here GTK Radiant 1.5, and that was in fall 2012 so I remember little about what exactly I was trying to do with it. 
Oh Yeah 
There was one variation - it may have been GTK 1.5 - that really fucked with the immediacy of simple manipulations. 
I was using a few versions back of NetRadiant to also clarify. :) 
You are all wrong and Quest rules. HTH 
Interesting Discussion 
Glad to hear that TB's interface seems natural and easy to use to some people - that was one of my main goals. I have tried going for consistency in how the interface works, which is I think what sets TB apart from Radiant, which always seemed a bit inconsistent in how it used keyboard shortcuts and modifiers.

That said, I don't believe at all that you can map faster in TB than you can in Radiant. It doesn't have a secret ingredient, and what's more, it's still missing a lot of time saving power features like an arch builder, a primitive builder, terrain builders, and better texturing tools. But I do think that the features that are there work together well and allow for comparable mapping speeds.

I do remember when I switched from WC to Radiant I was really impressed by how much faster I was mapping in Radiant once I got over the initial clunkiness of the interface. Two things that immediately converted me were the "click outside and drag to resize brush" and three point clipper tools. So what I tried doing in TB is give mappers similar tools for speed, but a more consistent interface that's easier to learn.

Kinn, it's nice to see you trying out TB and giving feedback on what's missing for you - thanks! 
Yes, I really don't want to feel like I'm missing out on something great, so I'm trying to give TB my best shot. I'm probably gonna keep pestering for radiant-like features though! 
I would say in most cases it's the simplest features that make a difference in how fast or efficient you can work.
For instance, I always thought it was a shame how in Radiant the "drag to resize" feature mentioned above was so unreliable since it worked on all axes at the same time - if you didn't move the mouse 101% horizontally, it would move or resize the brush to the front or back. The custom Netradiant is much improved in this sense, because by holding shift while dragging it locks the movement to the current axis in the same way that TB does. I'm actually not sure if this is a new feature or if it has always been in Radiant and I just never noticed. Probably not, but would be typical if the latter was the case. Pretty much like I kept discovering "new" and highly useful features in Quest even after a decade of using it... 
I remember Radiant's resize feature working in exactly the way that TB's does. I'm referring to the original QERadiant for Q2 though. 
Probably a symptom of the "100 variants of radiant" problem, but when I tried Radiant, I remember the "drag to resize" feature stretches the whole brush.. as in, you're stretching the bounding box, and all of the brush's vertices are stretched to fit in the new bounding box. TB doesn't have this at all (and I think TB's face dragging is a more useful default, although the stretch the whole brush behaviour could be useful in some cases) 
For the record, I call that "Scaling", and there's already a feature request:

I plan to implement that soon, but I want it to be more like a free transform tool like in Photoshop. You could then use it to scale, skew, and non-uniform-scale the selected objects. Maybe even rotate, too. 
Which editor has the best tools for making arches, cylinders, hollowed-out cylinders? I use Trenchbroom but I haven't tried any other editors. I picked it up because of Daz's video. 
If you're working with different editors then where's your new map? It would be good for quake mapping in 2017. 
If you're working with different editors then where's your new map?

I'm not really supposed to say anything about it yet but it's a quake engine RPG type game. A free thing, not commercial. Hey, if it all goes tits up I can always turn the maps into quake maps. The design philosophy is pretty much the same. 
Sounds Cool 
Fingers crossed :} 
it's a quake engine RPG type game. A free thing, not commercial.

I wish you the best of luck on your efforts! 
Which editor has the best tools for making arches, cylinders, hollowed-out cylinders? I use Trenchbroom but I haven't tried any other editors. I picked it up because of Daz's video.

Cheers Bloughs 
I appreciate it :) 
Has made mapping even easier for those moving from Source to Quake.

Also, yes, if you don't have as good an aptitude for turning 2d into 3d, TB is your match. I always felt severely restricted by TB. Maybe its better in TB2. Did that ever get released yet?

Oh and radiant is unintuitive, not as bad as *cough* Quark though. 
MissBubbles, Naitathingy, the Episode Jam. 
it's fucking free. i enjoy making maps, it makes me feel like a child again... it's a side project near my heart 
You must be logged in to post in this thread.
Website copyright © 2002-2020 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.