 News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register |
Log in |
|
|
<https://dlc.library.columbia.edu/catalog?f[lib_project_short_ssim][]=Hugh+Ferriss+Architectural+Drawings>Hugh Ferriss Architectural Drawings</a>
Someone gave me a wetransfer link at work and the background image on the download page just happened to be this:
https://backgrounds.wetransfer.net/cintavidal/3_v1_1920x1200.jpg That led me to find this artist: http://cintavidal.com/ Interesting... not sure about his backgrounds, though. In the pic you linked, I love the stairs that lead nowhere, near the bottom left.
I clicked a thing, then found related searches and wound up with this epicness:
https://goo.gl/Kcffhh Here's the portfolio of a guy who replied to the original ad from the latest post in the Jobs thread: https://www.artstation.com/artist/malex
He makes beautiful stuff and some of it feels very quakey. I just deleted 75% of the map I am working on and because of it I now have more motivation and confidence to create exactly what I have in my head.
I believe Necros said that iteration is a necessary evil in map design and sometimes that problem is the very thing you do not want to remove. You scratch in every place but the actual source. I had a huge central landmark that I was initially happy about. Since I spent so much time on it, I was stubborn on modifying it and tried to build my map based around said landmark. It resulted in numerous uninspired rooms connected to said structure. Inspiration can come from a blank slate, a more refined outlook on your projected visions for a design. Sometimes you have to scratch that itch directly at the source and then some! I know the feeling. As a composer, I have more unfinished bits and pieces than actual listenable tracks. Don't throw that landmark away, though: it's very possible that at a later date you'll find the inspiration that presently eludes you. I have some stuff based on very old ideas that I couldn't resign myself to throw in the bin.
Sometimes it is better to remove everything and visualize parts that worked together well, instead of trying keep that "own baby" alive too long, it also helps if you're already "dead inside" then sacrifices like those will not matter at all. In many cases the end result might not be the most awesome looking, though it really helps if you're about 50% of design and 50% visuals, those will lead to some compromises to be made during the mapping.
Sometimes it is good to let the visuals speaks, those are often what makes the map memorable. Then in the other hand design can keep it fun/interesting longer than just the brushwork itself. Challenge is something really hard to pull off right, especially since that difficulty level has been changed a lot from 1996 to these days, by that I mean it is not just the map's design or your own vision what to follow alone. Quake's enemy AI doesn't like complex shapes, and loves simple straight hallways.. that way something boring looking might turn into something that just "feels good", it is more important that the map feels good "mostly" than just looks good. it is more important that the map feels good "mostly" than just looks good.
That's a good way to put it NewHouse. I don't think my previous iteration "felt" good so thus we begin anew. Of course it is good to try out new things. I personally loved your first release, it felt like a little venture. Sure it was a bit small map, but had so many memorable elements in it. All I'm waiting is something in a bigger scale really, since you already have that your own personal touch there and there.
|
|
| This thread has been closed by a moderator. |
|
| Website copyright © 2002-2024 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors. |