Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Fonze

Has this ever been done before and where

Recommended Posts

This requires voodoo dolls so Boom +


I'm sure that I'm not the first person to use this mechanic, but I have never seen it done before. While I've done this a few times and see many uses for it, I'd really like to see if others have used it in the past, as well as how and why they used it.

What I'm talking about here is dynamic architecture that functions only on a particular difficulty setting, which by the old way of thinking would just not be possible to do without scripting, as triggers cannot be difficulty-specific; only things can. However, through the use of "things," or more specifically monsters, lifts can be moved which in turn move conveyor belts with voodoo dolls on them.

Screenshots

Spoiler






Bottom, monster closet. Middle, lift. Top, voodoo doll.


The implications of this are not limited to any one thing. Literally any architecture can be changed on a whim for each difficulty level. This could have a profound effect on puzzle wads as well.

This could be worked-around in vanilla as well, as a system of monster-activated lifts can be used to change a players route right at the dynamic-architecture triggers.

While there is that small part of me that'd be kinda happy if this has never been done before, I'm sure it has and would like to see some examples of mappers better than I using it and how they used it in their wads.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know of any wads doing this. I can see why: When a mapper aims to create a well-playable map (as opposed to being creative for the creativity itself in the first place), implementing difficulty settings is one of the more bothersome aspects of mapping (often even feeling like a waste of time), so that most mappers try to spend as little time as possible on it, and focus their effort and ideas onto other aspects, primarily those that are at least apparent to all players.

The danger of your proposed technique lies in potentially causing maps to become unbeatable on -nomonsters mode or under specific voodoo-doll-disabling settings, but other than that, cool! And I can see how this would be doable in vanilla too. Monsters/things would physically block raising floors in dummy sectors by their own bodies, so that the floors would stay low, and as neighbors to sectors joined with sectors in the map, their heights would affect further triggered linedef actions doing floor/ceiling height changes all around the map.

Share this post


Link to post

I do miniature-versions of stuff like this. e.g. in swim with the whales there are pits that are inescapable in UV, but have teles in <=HMP, similarly there are egregiously obnoxious platforming sequences that are replaced by a simple lift on lower difficulties.

in stardate 20x7 I have a few encounters that operate differently depending on difficulty setting, m04/m05 have enemies raised on platforms that will eventually lower on UV, forcing the player to deal with them sooner, but they stay perched on lower settings, etc. There might also be some spots where damaging floors on converted into non-damaging floors on lower settings, but I can't remember offhand.

I've toyed with the idea of doing this on a larger scale, where it more directly effects central map architecture, but I never really had the motivation to pursue it. It was always much easier to do things like moving keys around. e.g. sunlust m30, where on HMP a key is given in a different spot, and the portion of the map it used to live (on UV) in is now completely empty and inaccessible.

I say go for it, maybe you'll come up with some cool ideas :)

Share this post


Link to post
Fonze said:

What I'm talking about here is dynamic architecture that functions only on a particular difficulty setting, which by the old way of thinking would just not be possible to do without scripting, as triggers cannot be difficulty-specific; only things can. However, through the use of "things," or more specifically monsters, lifts can be moved which in turn move conveyor belts with voodoo dolls on them.


The problem with doing stuff like that is that it's extra work that the player will literally only notice if they play the same level multiple times on different difficulty levels. Even if you have different paths within the same difficulty, it's still extra design work that only pays off on multiple playthroughs.

Most people seem to play levels only once anyway.

Share this post


Link to post

I was just doing stuff similar to this today on our mutiny maps. I found out that I can basically transform maps into hacked versions of themselves (imagine dwangos edited versions of the iwad maps) for deathmatch by putting teleport destinations where I would normally place the deathmatch starts, and isolate the deathmatch starts in a little external area similar to a voodoo script hallway. The deathmatch players run over series of closely packed linedef actions followed by a teleport which drops them off into the map. The linedef actions seal off useless hallways and rooms and knock down walls and keeps doors open to open up the layout. I can also put deathmatch only weapons on the map by putting them on a 32x32 sector and sinking it a few hundred units into the ground, then have the deathmatch starts trip some instantly raising floor triggers to put them in the map. Just gotta be careful that the 32x32 sectors dont impair monster movement in single player. When my maps are done I can show you.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree scifista, I think many mappers would shy away from it for that reason, as well as how unlikely it is that someone will replay the same wad, let alone on a different difficulty setting. Though puzzle-maps could still benefit greatly from puzzles being made easier for the easier difficulties through this.

Tbh, I didn't think of the vanilla implementation as you did. Using a combination of short and tall monsters in the way that you mentioned could lead to some pretty interesting effects that are perhaps more versatile than what I had pictured, as the player would never have to encounter a lift then.



Ribbiks: yeah I've seen teleporters and other thing-based things done before, but I will have to check out what you did in stardate 20x7; that sounds really interesting. I've read good things about it, though I haven't played it yet, so it'll be cool for me to go in, play them, and see how they were done.

If you do continue to toy with that idea in the distant future, it would probably be easier to stay motivated to have a partner who not only knows how much work that would entail but who is also willing to put in that work for a shared goal; it'd certainly cut down on the frustration and total headache of it all. I do know how much work that would require, though my concern would be on whether-or-not I could keep up with your speed of mapping; I'd hate to feel like a worthless member of a supposed team. But if you ever get the itch for it, send me a line :)



Quin: that's true, but that also depends on the player. I would guess that to expect anything other than a player playing your map once is sheer folly, but there are a good chunk of people, like myself, that do enjoy replaying wads, so it's not a bad thing to put in the extra time for those people (especially if you are one!). Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, it adds interest to a map. Look at the comparison between linear vs non-linear then make the non-linear paths totally different from one another. You can make multiple maps in one map, which is an idea I've toyed with before in my father's day map and which Z0k and I almost did in WormHell, but would like to fully do one day.

Point is, I think it pays off even if people do only one playthrough because the wad can be different things to different people, which, at least to me, is interesting.



40: that sounds like a cool idea; though I thought that there was a DM flag in vanilla, which makes me wonder why the 32x32 sectors would be necessary. Maybe I'm just reading that wrong; idk. But if they are truly necessary, why not place the vast majority in the "dynamic" sectors and leave the rest to corners where monsters are unlikely to go?

And yes, definitely send those maps over when you're done: I'd love to take a look at them :)

Share this post


Link to post
Fonze said:

Quin: that's true, but that also depends on the player. I would guess that to expect anything other than a player playing your map once is sheer folly, but there are a good chunk of people, like myself, that do enjoy replaying wads, so it's not a bad thing to put in the extra time for those people (especially if you are one!). Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, it adds interest to a map. Look at the comparison between linear vs non-linear then make the non-linear paths totally different from one another. You can make multiple maps in one map, which is an idea I've toyed with before in my father's day map and which Z0k and I almost did in WormHell, but would like to fully do one day.

Point is, I think it pays off even if people do only one playthrough because the wad can be different things to different people, which, at least to me, is interesting.


It only adds "interest" to your map if the player notices, which they DEFINITELY WON'T on the first play, and may not on subsequent playthroughs. You'll be doing extra work ONLY for people who play the level multiple times on different difficulties, and there's no guarantee that the extra work will result in extra fun.

You CAN make multiple maps in one map, but why do so instead of just making multiple maps?

Share this post


Link to post

Vanilla has a "multiplayer" flag which makes the thing appear in coop AND deathmatch. Not trying to give players BFGs on coop on MAP01 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Quineotio said:

It only adds "interest" to your map if the player notices, which they DEFINITELY WON'T on the first play, and may not on subsequent playthroughs. You'll be doing extra work ONLY for people who play the level multiple times on different difficulties, and there's no guarantee that the extra work will result in extra fun.

You CAN make multiple maps in one map, but why do so instead of just making multiple maps?


Who gives a shit? It's pretty damn sad to abstain from design choices you -- as the mapper -- find cool and interesting just because you're worried only a few people will appreciate them. What are you, some kind of slave who works only for other players? Might as well quit mapping because there's no amount of praise that'll justify the time you spend. If there's a design choice you really like, go the extra mile and implement it, care not at all if anyone notices.

Share this post


Link to post

Ah that explains it; I forgot, heh. Still, it seems there should be an easier way than 32x32 sectors, but I see where you're coming from and perhaps that is for the best. I look forward to seeing them.

rdwpa said:

Who gives a shit? It's pretty damn sad to abstain from design choices you -- as the mapper -- find cool and interesting just because you're worried only a few people will appreciate them. What are you, some kind of slave who works only for other players? Might as well quit mapping because there's no amount of praise that'll justify the time you spend. If there's a design choice you really like, go the extra mile and implement it, care not at all if anyone notices.


I might've said it either nicer or with more curse words, but that's about close enough.

Share this post


Link to post
rdwpa said:

Who gives a shit? It's pretty damn sad to abstain from design choices you -- as the mapper -- find cool and interesting just because you're worried only a few people will appreciate them. What are you, some kind of slave who works only for other players?


If you want to spend time adding stuff to your levels most people aren't going to interact with AT ALL, that's your choice of course. But it's not something I'd recommend for the reasons I wrote above. It's not about being a slave to other players, it's about using your time effectively.

rdwpa said:

If there's a design choice you really like, go the extra mile and implement it, care not at all if anyone notices.


Sure, but even if you're doing it for yourself, are you really playing your own levels over and over again on different difficulties? To each their own.

Share this post


Link to post

If you make something good, people will replay it. Also, people will talk about it. Either way, the differences will become apparent in the end. It's really the same concept as making a non-linear map.

Share this post


Link to post
Ribbiks said:

I do miniature-versions of stuff like this. e.g. in swim with the whales there are pits that are inescapable in UV, but have teles in <=HMP, similarly there are egregiously obnoxious platforming sequences that are replaced by a simple lift on lower difficulties.


Same. In 1994TU maps 9 and 15 use this for making small changes depending on skill settings and multiplayer. 15 changes lighting in an area (darker for UV) and 9 I think removed a crate to reduce the amount of cover on UV. On 15 an ammo cave opens up if playing MP.

It has some great replay value for sure. I recall 40oz and I chatting about the possibilities awhile back.

You don't have to use monster things either. Items can trigger a number of generalised linedef codes. I'll find a couple of test maps I made. One was a DM map with alternating item spawns.

Travers

Share this post


Link to post
40oz said:

I was just doing stuff similar to this today on our mutiny maps. I found out that I can basically transform maps into hacked versions of themselves (imagine dwangos edited versions of the iwad maps) for deathmatch by putting teleport destinations where I would normally place the deathmatch starts, and isolate the deathmatch starts in a little external area similar to a voodoo script hallway. The deathmatch players run over series of closely packed linedef actions followed by a teleport which drops them off into the map.

I believe it should be doable while putting the deathmatch starts into the map itself rather than isolating them in dummy sectors with teleporters, even in vanilla, using a system of lowering / raising floors neighboring with each other in dummy sectors, activated by special linedefs around the deathmatch starts in certain ways, and by special linedefs around coop starts in different ways that would cancel out the deathmatch ways if triggered first.

Share this post


Link to post
Quineotio said:

It only adds "interest" to your map if the player notices, which they DEFINITELY WON'T on the first play, and may not on subsequent playthroughs. You'll be doing extra work ONLY for people who play the level multiple times on different difficulties, and there's no guarantee that the extra work will result in extra fun.

You CAN make multiple maps in one map, but why do so instead of just making multiple maps?


You're assuming everyone plays on the same skill level all the time. If you make a "what skill level do you play on" thread you'll get a lot of UV answers but there are a good few of HMP and HNTR players too. There are a lot of difficult wads out there and sometimes when someone cant beat it, they're grateful they are permitted to tone it down. Having the ability to optimize skill settings is more liberating for a mapper because if a map is too hard or too easy, the player can select skill levels accordingly. Its a courteous thing to do, and I prefer not to punish OR bore my players.

Share this post


Link to post
40oz said:

If you make a "what skill level do you play on" thread you'll get a lot of UV answers but there are a good few of HMP and HNTR players too.

That would still be in compliance with the statement that each particular person plays on the same difficulty - that is, whether it's UV or HMP or HNTR (for different people), the same person mostly keeps playing on the same his/her preferred one. I'm not against the idea of your post, just pointing this out.

Share this post


Link to post
traversd said:

You don't have to use monster things either. Items can trigger a number of generalised linedef codes. I'll find a couple of test maps I made. One was a DM map with alternating item spawns.

Travers


This was a direct test of the skill settings/different triggers.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/56320770/td_genericlinedefscripts1.wad

This was a test of using items themselves to trigger actions (to make a crude alternating item spawn)
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/56320770/dm_boomteamedpowerups.wad

Share this post


Link to post
scifista42 said:

I believe it should be doable while putting the deathmatch starts into the map itself rather than isolating them in dummy sectors with teleporters, even in vanilla, using a system of lowering / raising floors neighboring with each other in dummy sectors, activated by special linedefs around the deathmatch starts in certain ways, and by special linedefs around coop starts in different ways that would cancel out the deathmatch ways if triggered first.


It certainly can in most maps. The map in question that I was using is very nonlinear and most of the map is tightly packed, so this way was a foolproof way of implementing it into the map without risk of the map breaking.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×