Detailaholics Anonymous

I'd like to call this meeting for all of us who are powerless against, helpless, and hopelessly addicted to detail. I mean "Crashes ZDoom" levels of detail. So much detail that a single map's linedef and sector data alone is almost as large as the doom2.wad itself. Enough detail to make Deus Vult look like E3M1.

Who amongst you also suffers from detailaholism? I can't help it, I just keep adding sectors and sectors and sectors. And just when I think I'm done, I see a 32 unit length linedef with no decorations on it. I haven't been able to release a map in almost two years, and when I look back at the ones I did release, I'm sickened by how "simple" they are.

Someone should invent a Detail patch, or detail gum, so I could satisfy my craving. Otherwise, eventually I'll get to the point where I'll try and make a sector for each atom in the room.

Well, perhaps the main point to bear in mind is that the overall aim is to make the map look good (and play well), and this means having an appropriate level of detail to achieve the effect you're trying to accomplish. Some areas need more detail to look right, while others would be spoilt by having excessive detail.

Too much twiddly detail can also make a map play worse, if the player keeps getting snagged by it in the middle of battles. Don't be scared to include some clean straight lines where it is appropriate to have them.

Too many people are of the opinion that detail = lots of sectors. A great deal of detail can be obtained through creative texture use.

This screen shot doesn't have a vast ammount of sectors, but instead uses a lot of custom textures to create a sense of detail

http://www.duellist.net/nsjr5a.png

..just my opinion.

Is that pimping of a new Russel Map?

Oh you're sooo cynical :)

I agree with Russell here. It's not too many sectors, but making the map visually interesting and entertaining.

eh, I've never seen a map which has enough detail to make ZDoom crash, and ones like Deus Vult don't even seem to slow down for me at all. Yes, that's on map05.

But anyway, yes, I am addicted to high detail, but not to such a degree that I place something every 8 map pixels.

While I do spend quite a lot of time detailing my maps, I also spend a lot of time tweaking the gameplay of them as well.

I wouldn't exactly say that I qualify as a "detailaholic", though. :P

"Detail" is creating a believable atmosphere by adding character flaws to maps, like torn carpet. Face it - no one room in the game is going to be in pristine condition. I don't go overboard on sectors, but I put enough detail in that the area is consequently believable as a real place.

Im adding detail in my maps because it looks a lot better,a player must have something nice to look at.
A lot of wads that i play i don't even finish,i just keep getting that boring feeling because its under-detailed.
I just want to be surprised when im opening a door and see another sweet looking detailed room.
I guess you can say im a big detailaholic.

Yeah I like my sectors and sidedefs.

Personaly, I'm a minimalist. If it can be done with as little as possible, then that's how it shall be done.

Russell_P said:

Too many people are of the opinion that detail = lots of sectors. A great deal of detail can be obtained through creative texture use.

This screen shot doesn't have a vast ammount of sectors, but instead uses a lot of custom textures to create a sense of detail

http://www.duellist.net/nsjr5a.png

..just my opinion.

Needs more sectors. :P


Anyway, I'm the king of vertexes, so far anyway.

Sometimes the right textures make up for the need for excessive sectors.

If the basic structure of a map is done right, there won't be any need for super detailing or any of that popular copy/paste shit I see everywhere these days. Architecture that is stately and bold will suffice just fine.

And as far as I'm concerned, "realism" really doesn't have any purpose in a game like Doom. Pimping out a 256x256 room with all sorts of little sectors is almost a moot point.

A map doesn't have to have a shitload of detail to look good, hell, look at Revolution!, it made me pretty imressed without going overboard on the detail.

Russell_P said:

Oh you're sooo cynical :)

I was serious :( I want more Russell maps. In fact, make Doom raider 2... I'll draw you a whip and revolver when ZDoom gets custom weapons. YOu can make places where you have to whip an outcropping and swing across :D

I know, I know, you don't need all this detail. That's my problem, I just can't help it! That said, the map does look friggin amazing. I just get these ideas about what I want certain areas to look like, and it just so happens that I need 20 billion sectors to create it.

Danarchy said:

Personaly, I'm a minimalist. If it can be done with as little as possible, then that's how it shall be done.

Best way to do.

Well, I'm glad that I don't suffer from this detailaholism syndrome that you speak of....
Yet I do admit that I like to drag the time of working on a single map by messing around with the Things/Objects placement, texture choices, and trigger-tripwires galore!
Yup, that's good ol' me :)

Detail is indeed closely related to high sector/linedef count; you get details when you concentrate on small tidbits. Good texture use can make a map pretty, but that's not detail, although it can certainly be combined with it. Now, lots of detail doesn't necessarily make the most pleasing or neatest maps, but that's what it is; smaller scale sectoring to produce more (ideally) intricate designs. Let's not get confused just because some people seem to worship detail; that a map looks good doesn't mean it's detailed unless you pretty much believe that detail makes beauty.

I don't go for obscene amounts of detail. Personally, I try to give my maps a clean, simple style. Cramming 10 sectors into a 64 x 64 space is not beauty.

I actually went and checked to see if I ever made 10 sectors within a 64 X 64 block. Thankfully I didn't.

I personally don't think the detail I'm putting in is "pointless". I'll post some screenshots for you to judge and label as having too much detail. Some of these are repeats from the WIP entry, but WIP is down anyway.











Yes, I know the texture alignment on the bronze things is terrible, but I like it anyway.

Sometimes I think that sort of architecture is weird because of the funky experimentation with door textures.

Recently scrapped my map. Too much pointless detail and not enough fun stuff.. gonna start a new one now

A map doesn't need detail to look good. Like Russel said, it can be of great texturing or just original ideas. Agent Spork maps aren't crammed with detail but the lighting is great.
I can overdetail maps easily but I choose not to because I don't think maps look good like that.
If you look at these three screenshots of a map of mine they aren't full of detail but still look good. They rely more on large areas and texturing.
http://doomrealm.mancubus.net/img/reviews/them1.gif
http://doomrealm.mancubus.net/img/reviews/them2.gif
http://doomrealm.mancubus.net/img/reviews/them3.gif

And this shot relies on using a lot of area too, as well as using textures that blend in together:
http://www.hoodooguru.com/images/other/view2.jpg

try not to give the edges of circular skylights and ponds a 'polygonal' look. give it more sides. I generally try to may round things as round as possible.

I'm just checking in because I belong in this thread. I don't actually have anything to say but that I won't stay anonymous anymore :P

Show them the levels you made where the only reason they exist is for excess, pointless detail.

*cough* gothic99 *cough*