Why does mapping for Unreal engine suck so hard?

I really love Killing Floor 2 and am having blast playing many people's custom maps online. So I figured I would try making my own map and downloaded the KF 2 SDK. Then I fired it up and saw unreal ed. "Ugh" I thought to myself, since I remembered messing around with it at some distant point in the past and not liking it. After watching a couple of tutorials online and fiddling around with it a bit I remembered why: Because mapping for it is a pain.

You will never appreciate how easy it is to make rooms in any brush based Quake engine based game, until after you have been forced to make anything in Unreal engine. Instead of just dragging a box around to make a brush, you actually have to open a window and manually tweak some numbers until the brush you want to make is exactly as big as you want it to be. Making anything is a total pain.

Why is it that unreal engine became so popular?

Has hardcore gamer ever made a thread that doesn't pose a question?

Tarnsman said:

Has hardcore gamer ever made a thread that doesn't pose a question?

What is wrong with making a thread which asks why the unreal engine became so popular, even though it (at least from a mappers perspective) sucks to use?

hardcore_gamer said:

Instead of just dragging a box around to make a brush, you actually have to open a window and manually tweak some numbers until the brush you want to make is exactly as big as you want it to be. Making anything is a total pain.

First of all, you can drag brushes and templates around however you want. Secondly, being able to alter the brush size and shape the exact dimensions you want is a problem? I would assume you can do this in quake and source editors as well, no? Unrealed is awful for a variety of reasons, but this is really not one of them.

hardcore_gamer said:

What is wrong with making a thread which asks why the unreal engine became so popular, even though it (at least from a mappers perspective) sucks to use?

If it sucks then why IS it so popular? Perhaps you should question if you're using it right after putting in 1 hour and reading a few tutorials on their website. There are literally hundreds of thousands of games that use Unreal so it can't be that bad.

The real question here is "Why does hardcore_gamer suck so much?"

I learned UnrealEd for UT2004 back in uni in a couple of months. It's not difficult and very powerful if you bother going through tutorials or getting hold of a book on the subject. I think I've shown the tower CTF map I made for my final project of that module here before.

Unreal 4 is pretty easy to map for. You can even make a random map generator. Of course easy is all relative. I'm only comparing it to Doom 3 and the Hammer editor. Its still not as easy to edit for Doom.

For anyone wondering why it became popular, same as Photoshop... its taught at colleges. Get it in the hands of kids and make them slaves for life. McDonalds knows this.

They also churn out quality video tutorials day after day and yes I watch them all.

hardcore_gamer said:

Why is it that unreal engine became so popular?

I Suppose it's popular because it offers pretty much everything that a developer might need in order to make developing a game easier, less painful, and sufficient .

Literally all you need is your own assets and some coding knowledge you're set for making a game fit for sale.

SavageCorona said:

If it sucks then why IS it so popular?

If Corona sucks so hard, when is it so popular?

dio said:

For anyone wondering why it became popular, same as Photoshop... its taught at colleges. Get it in the hands of kids and make them slaves for life. McDonalds knows this.

Is this only true in the US? I haven't ever heard about this.

Why do you keep making threads like this? Are you even aware of what you're posting?

Ho-boy, here we go...

I think the problem is that this is a thing that can be very intimidating at first, but with time and patience, becomes a piece of cake.

I've had this happen in the past with GIMP. Believe me, using GIMP was very different from Paint Shop Pro 7, and its multi-window inference didn't help much, but sooner or later, I managed to get the hang of it. (I was using Ubuntu at the time, and GIMP was the only option I had.) As soon as single-window mode was implemented (and with me back on Windows), I tried it again, and with me being good in GIMP, I have not had a single problem with it since.

Why comparing an almost 20 year old game to current gen Unreal?

Also pretty sure your story about making brushes is user error. Have you even done any tutorials? I have. Never encountered trouble making any size brush (snap to grid etc.). Not to say you can't also do brush size stuff manually... but not required... afaik... been a few years.

Godling said:

Why comparing an almost 20 year old game to current gen Unreal?

They do not make them like they used to?

GhostlyDeath said:

They do not make them like they used to?

Current method is to use models for detailing an environment... while Quake uses simple brushes for pretty much everything. About the only model (obviously excluding monsters, items, etc.) used in Quake is the animated flames for the wall-sconces.

Quake's start map is a simple example... today, those braziers would probably be built in 3DSMax, or Softimage, or Maya, etc... and that would allow them to be more detailed (generally) than the surrounding environment. You then load those brazier models into the level editor, as opposed to building them directly there, and you place them the same way you place monsters or items.

The actual level brushes placed with Unreal use CSG, or "Constructive Solid Geometry. It's a weird way of doing things if you only know Doom or Quake editing. Unreal's CSG is usually just for defining the world limits... floors, walls and other gross geography, while detail comes from imported models built in other programs.

Of course, SnapMap will change the way we build FPS maps forever.[/sarcasm]

Dave The Daring said:

Of course, SnapMap will change the way we build FPS maps forever.[/sarcasm]

If the rooms in SnapMap could be thought of as nodes, we need a node editor for sure. Maybe if Doom sells well and is SnapMap is popular, we'll see more tools?

Godling said:

Quake's start map is a simple example... today, those braziers would probably be built in 3DSMax, or Softimage, or Maya, etc... and that would allow them to be more detailed (generally) than the surrounding environment. You then load those brazier models into the level editor, as opposed to building them directly there, and you place them the same way you place monsters or items.

To be honest I have never really actually played Quake 1 (played for about maybe 30 or so minutes in my life time), so do you have a picture of these baziers you are talking about?

GhostlyDeath said:

To be honest I have never really actually played Quake 1 (played for about maybe 30 or so minutes in my life time), so do you have a picture of these baziers you are talking about?

Couldn't find a screen... so linking a walk-through vid. It's in the first few seconds anyway... player looks left and right... 1 brazier on each side.

hardcore_gamer said:

If Corona sucks so hard, when is it so popular?

I don't think directly attacking someone is a good way to get an answer.

Tarnsman said:

Has hardcore gamer ever made a thread that doesn't pose a question?

Not as far as I can remember, no.

Let's be fair, though, some of the questions he poses are pretty interesting.

Man, and I thought people singed me out for my threads... Some of you guys need to relax. The poor bastard is just frustrated. Fucking around with 3D is not easy for most.

hardcore_gamer said:

If Corona sucks so hard, when is it so popular?

Is this only true in the US? I haven't ever heard about this.

There are colleges / universities that teach it in the UK as well.

https://www.unrealengine.com/education

I'm not sure people need college courses when they have online tutorials, but personalized guidance always helps. Along with a college or university saying yes this person knows their stuff.

Best thing is learn all you can, make a hit game, then drop out.

Been messing around with the editor more and looking up some more tutorials. Will admit that the engine has a few advantages to it, but I still hate it how doing something as simple as creating a room can take 2-3 extra steps compared to Hammer or Radiant.

It appears that I made a mistake originally when I thought the game world should be made out of brushes. You instead use models/meshes which have already been designed for you and then apply textures to them. It's a interesting method but while it should make things easier on paper (and I admit that in some cases it can, like if you want complex shapes), it often just means that even something as simple as creating a box which in Hammer/Radiant could be done in seconds, can be a fairly complex multi-step process. It's annoying as heck.

I wonder what purpose brushes serve, seeing as you aren't really suppose to use them.

GoatLord said:

*hits blunt*

Man, and I thought people singed me out for my threads... Some of you guys need to relax. The poor bastard is just frustrated. Fucking around with 3D is not easy for most.

For once, you are right... 3D modeling isn't for everyone. I found that out the hard way... :(

Godling said:

Couldn't find a screen... so linking a walk-through vid. It's in the first few seconds anyway... player looks left and right... 1 brazier on each side.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g70rtT96DY

Yeah I agree with you that today they would have been more likely modeled objects rather than game geometry. If not that, at least a prefab.

hardcore_gamer said:

but I still hate it how doing something as simple as creating a room can take 2-3 extra steps compared to Hammer or Radiant.

What exactly are you doing? This can be done in unrealed with 2 button clicks. Click polygon button of choice, click subtract and voila.

hardcore_gamer said:

Been messing around with the editor more and looking up some more tutorials. Will admit that the engine has a few advantages to it, but I still hate it how doing something as simple as creating a room can take 2-3 extra steps compared to Hammer or Radiant.

It appears that I made a mistake originally when I thought the game world should be made out of brushes. You instead use models/meshes which have already been designed for you and then apply textures to them. It's a interesting method but while it should make things easier on paper (and I admit that in some cases it can, like if you want complex shapes), it often just means that even something as simple as creating a box which in Hammer/Radiant could be done in seconds, can be a fairly complex multi-step process. It's annoying as heck.

I wonder what purpose brushes serve, seeing as you aren't really suppose to use them.

Biggest advantage is they'll push your game to market. GameMaker and Unity won't. Hammer is worse than Unreal 4 for creating rooms. If its harder, you're doing it wrong. Like damn this saw won't work on this sheet of paper. Well are you using the handle or the blade?

I've got randomly generated rooms going in Unreal 4.

Quast said:

What exactly are you doing? This can be done in unrealed with 2 button clicks. Click polygon button of choice, click subtract and voila.

You don't use brushes for creating rooms.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-HvFnxwvxQ

dio said:

Biggest advantage is they'll push your game to market. GameMaker and Unity won't. Hammer is worse than Unreal 4 for creating rooms. If its harder, you're doing it wrong. Like damn this saw won't work on this sheet of paper. Well are you using the handle or the blade?

I've got randomly generated rooms going in Unreal 4.

Killing Floor 2 uses unreal 3 and not 4. I don't have experience using unreal 4.