Detailing Greenwar2: Still going! Go claim some new maps!

Tango said:

Hey, if you want more of a say in the maps (whether they should be included, level of detail), just speak up. :)

We've all put a lot of work in this so far, but if you're looking different, I'm sure the team would be willing to... I don't know, start over? If you're looking for something different, we can always try again. :)

Thanks Tango, appreciate that. (obviously you're not serious about starting over.) I did speak up in the beginning and was more or less shut down.

A few things that bother me so far:

areas that you can jump to but can't get to because of an impassible linedef. Make the ledge too high to jump too, otherwise it becomes muddled and inconsistent as to what area you are supposed to be able to reach and what area is for only for realism/looks etc.

Two sided linedefs that are made impassible cause stickiness!! please try to avoid using these at all costs. Surely I'm not the only one who gets snagged on these? (or maybe it's a novelty of zdoom 1.22--which is the only zdoom that the people I dm with all agree doesn't crash randomly like the latest versions)

keeping layout intact: avoid removing walls. This is a biggie because a major theme that apparently has emerged for detailing my maps is to remove the walls and detail outward outside the map (I totally did not foresee this--I didn't realize so many people would be doing this)

avoid detail rape--for me detail is about creating an aesthetic, a mood, a feeling, but I just don't think Doom engine is suited for being pushed to its limit. For me what happens with a lot of these detail jobs is they are too busy. You can't tell where the floor ends and the wall begins. It has a disconcerting effect for me. The layout seems to get lost in the shuffle, and for me it is a very unappealing place to DM. I am of the KISS philosophy.


The biggest concerns for me at this point are taking liberties with the layouts and using two sided linedefs with the impassible flag or other detailing methods (such as excessive linedef splicing abuse) that cause snagging.

Problems in my expectations I need to acknowledge: Basically, I don't know how to detail a map and keep things running smooth gameplaywise without interfering with gameplay to make it look good, so I thought maybe someone else would be able to. But the fact may be that it's just not possible. I am always making new dm wads, (I have about 500 unreleased maps) and all of them are ugly and undetailed, because the more I try to detail them the more I feel like gameplay gets detracted from, so I give up and keep it simple. I should have realized this before I got involved in this project with team 32in24. So either a compromise needs to be reached or I need to take the fukitol pill and just accept "Greenwar2" for what it turns out to be.... I'm afraid to say what kind of compromises I'd be willing to settle with because I know I won't be willing to settle so easily. But things that I am less willing to compromise on are two sided impassible (I really hate these--if you've played Greenwar--you know I never use them) Even on a recent map01 revision I made, I put the BFG behind the bars where the Imp is on map01 (near the exit door) but then I removed the impassible flag and put in a teeny sector whose height is 55 so to make it impassible to get beyond the bars. You can't tell that I added the sector because it is so small, but it removes the sticky behavior of the two sided impassible. Because when you try to grab the BFG through the bars, the impassible flag creates a weird sticking thing; basically I am EXTREMELY ANAL about a lot of things when it comes to DM mapping, and I didn't realize how much so until this project got underway. I have been mapping for too long and have developed a certain philosophy about which I have become, apparently (I didn't realize how much so) very rigid in.

So I apologize for this. Perhaps I'm a little crazy--or perhaps my rigidness is why a few individuals I share my maps with appreciate the layouts I do churn out on a regular basis in lieu of other nice looking dm maps that get released.

one major philosophy of mine in dm map making, that is the underlining philosophy, is smooth flowing, no snags. That's why there are no supports and detail in Greenwar. Because the more detail you put in, the more the fluidity and smoothness gets compromised.

Maybe everyone should do a run through of Greenwar before they start detailing maps in greenwar2. I dunno what to suggest at this point. I will say this, tho. I don't want Vader to start over, and I'm sure he never would, he spent way too much time on the map. But I would ask him to fix the impassible two sided lines.

did you have any problems with my map? i want to know the truth if there are any problems with it. because i have a tendency to build outwards and shift things a little bit. and you may just have to accept the fact its greenwar 2...

Butts said:

did you have any problems with my map? i want to know the truth if there are any problems with it. because i have a tendency to build outwards and shift things a little bit. and you may just have to accept the fact its greenwar 2...

Offhand, your map was one of the ones I liked the most. That map you did didn't cause confusion or have an effect of busyness that I have been complaining about. your addition of the crates was one of the rare gameplay/layout modifications i actually liked right off the bat. Those crates are a nice touch and your sparse use of snow was very nice. A simple layout modification that was tastefully done and didn't detract from the wad or alter gameplay in a fundamental way. I think your map is kind of the model of how in my stuck up idealistic mind the maps should be detailed. The layout is not lost at all in the detail. The detail makes for an appealing, nice place to DM in. Vader's first map he released was also very nice (can't remember the map--it was a small one). There were a few things with ledges that I didn't like from a gameplay point of view (not a detail/aesthetic pov) Essel's map with the horizontal stucco or cemement wall texture also, because the detail job here is also relatively simple and not BUSY and in this map his sense of aesthetic is inline with mine. (Can you tell I don't like business?) It has a nice clean look to it--and his architecture sensibilities were congruent with mine.

The ruins detail jobs are nice looking, but I prefer them less as far as creating an environment that begs to be DMed in. Butts, you and Vader (with his first map) set the bar in my mind of what I really liked. The Essel map I mentioned as well.

Other things that I think are superfluous and unnecessary and detracting: detail on the floor. leave the floors simple! broken bricks and debris and this and that cause bumps when you're running around and do not improve the gameplay. Cause unnecessary clutter. I'm willing to live with this, but if the detailer is willing to live without it, that'd be great. :D

One possible solution to the removing of walls is to put up a glass like transparent texture and somehow make rockets explode upon impact.
I believe TheGreenHerring did this with his map. Although as a rule I do NOT like the straightening of my off kilter shaped maps. That is sort of a signature or unique aspect of how I map. I sorry if it is difficult to detail--maybe put in fixtures in the ceiling or sumthin. If TGH hadn't done such a nice job detailing that map, I would prolly make more of a stink about it being reshaped. But, alas, I am giving in to detail over gameplay, when I strongly feel that if the detail requires altering anything in the map that would effect gameplay, then it shouldn't be done.

Bottom line I prefer clean, fluid, smooth detailing and nice use of contrast to break up uniform texture use. And layout kept intact. I'd detail one myself but I am really not good at detailing. (hence you guys!) But overall, really, everyone is doing a great job. There's a few detail jobs I'm not crazy about, but most of them are really quite nice.

ok, good, ill keep all that in mind while i detail the rest of your maps. the shape of your maps are cool, but is it ok if i align them to certain parts of the grid? because on the first map i did i spent the first part just simplifying the grid a little, but i pretty much kept the layout the same.

oh, and the name of my first map is "a greenwar2 base map"

Well, I dunno what to say... I'm sorry you don't like what I've done to nz12bx.
As you already have said, I think this is just what happens when you let other people detail your maps. You'll never be 100% pleased with the result, well because you just have other expectations as the person doing the detail work!
Another problem may be that I've never worked on any DM maps this far, so I can't really tell what elements of the layout may be relevant to be left exactly the way they were. Maybe it's just me, but I just need to move some walls and vertices around, make corridors wider and stuff like that, to get what in my IMO looks best.

Anyway, you're right that I won't start over again. I have more than enough other stuff on my hands ATM, so even rebuilding only small parts of the map won't work out for me. I fear you just have to take it the way it is or ask someone else to detail the layout from scratch for you!
I'd like to fix the two sided impassable linedefs though, if you could explain what exactly this "stickiness" is all about and more importantly; How to fix it properly?

Again, I'm sorry you feel the way you do!

Vader said:

Well, I dunno what to say... I'm sorry you don't like what I've done to nz12bx.
As you already have said, I think this is just what happens when you let other people detail your maps. You'll never be 100% pleased with the result, well because you just have other expectations as the person doing the detail work!
Another problem may be that I've never worked on any DM maps this far, so I can't really tell what elements of the layout may be relevant to be left exactly the way they were. Maybe it's just me, but I just need to move some walls and vertices around, make corridors wider and stuff like that, to get what in my IMO looks best.

Anyway, you're right that I won't start over again. I have more than enough other stuff on my hands ATM, so even rebuilding only small parts of the map won't work out for me. I fear you just have to take it the way it is or ask someone else to detail the layout from scratch for you!
I'd like to fix the two sided impassable linedefs though, if you could explain what exactly this "stickiness" is all about and more importantly; How to fix it properly?

Again, I'm sorry you feel the way you do!

Vader, the map in its own right as it is is very very good. Like I said, you are clearly very talented. It was simply the fact that it deviated from the original so much. (few areas if any were left in their original form.) On one hand, it's cool that a layout can inspire someone to modify it into a new and different version. It's just my misconception about what I thought this project was about. If this was the kind of thing I was expecting I'd say it's very cool. The detail aspect of your wad is excellent. There isn't a single thing I don't like about it. That marbface thing you did is really nice.

As far as sticky, I went through the wad again and I only noticed two places that this happens, and it's very easy to fix it. On Sectors 748 and 757: just make the floor height 17 instead of 16 on those sectors: this way when you run into it you won't go inside the enclave (because the step up will now be 25 instead of 24) and can only get inside by jumping inside.

About the whole grid thing--there's something sterile or inorganic in my mind having maps always be on a grid and always having right angles or neat systematic shapes to them (which now looking at your map Vader, I see that is how it is.) It's like you've taken out what is the essence of a Greenwar map (in my mind). I realize this makes it impractical to do high level of detail and otherwise very difficult. It looks nice in a map editor but it is just old hat for me when playing a dm wad. ALL wads seem to adhere to this. (Granted, many of my wads stick to the grid as well, but many don't and have odd shapes and angles.)

As far as reworking parts, I would like to ask if I may restore a couple things back to how they were. I won't change the shape of anything (nearly impossible with the amount of parallel sidedefs everywhere) but I would just restore some original flow that was lost in translation :) with some minor tweaking. Well, maybe not so easy. Before you could jump to the medkit but you've blocked it now with a wall. Anyway, when we playtest the map and if it plays well, then I guess the fact that it plays different than mine will just have to be accepted, because I think it will be too difficult to restore any of the original layout and gameplay elements without butchering your architectural style and theme.

Butts said:

ok, good, ill keep all that in mind while i detail the rest of your maps. the shape of your maps are cool, but is it ok if i align them to certain parts of the grid? because on the first map i did i spent the first part just simplifying the grid a little, but i pretty much kept the layout the same.

oh, and the name of my first map is "a greenwar2 base map"

Thanks Butts, granted, the shapes of my maps are nothing special, but I think they lend to interesting and often times exciting gameplay.

Which wad did you have in mind? If you "square" out the curved connectors on Swobux.wad I will poke my eyes out and forever bury my head in the snow and resign entirely from the project and just let you guys carry on and never look at any of the work henceforth! (half kidding, but not really) With Swobux, I basically do not one a single vertx moved heh--I feel that way with most my wads, but I like the shape of things in this map--and think it lends to how the wad plays.

By "'square' out" I mean straighten those connectors on the left side that connect to the outdoor area.

Also, where the floor dips and where it rises again outside; I'd hope the detailer would understand that the shape of those two sectors is intentional and not random, and the space between the raised floor and the lowered floor is carefully calculated and I don't want it altered. You guys make me feel bad because I am asking you to do an impossible job. But can't you just add sectors that contour or conform to the shape of the existing sectors rather than altering their shape? Can't you focus more of the detail on ceiling fixtures and detail there, rather than hacking the walls to kingdom come? Put in some fancy technical doodad in the sky-- or some visage of hellspawn wrangled up on a giant cube in the sky held up by horizontal supports or sumthin. might it not be a fun challenge to see how you can detail a map without altering any of its shape and gameplay elements?

Gampelay elements just means how the map plays, the kinds of encounters occur and the way in which certain objectives while playing the wad are achieved. (For example vader eliminated some jumping areas I had designed, which changed the gameplay of the map--maybe no worse--maybe better. How you get the plasma gun has also been simplified to a more generic jump on ledge, open door. The point is only that it's different than my original intent.)

I mean, okay, (back to the bit about maintaining original shape as much as possible) if you add a vertex to a line to get a line the right length for a texture and that changes the shape of the line slightly because before it was angled and now it straighted, fine, can't do anything about that and is not going to effect things much. But straightening out sector shapes to snap to a 16 or larger grid to be neat and tidy is against my grain.

Butts, and as far as the changes you made to your first map, I wasn't thrilled that you made things wider, but at least you had warned me ahead of time. And I have since had time to adjust to the changes and come to accept them (contingent the wad still plays well in playtesting) -- if Vader's map plays well, I will be much more inclined to accept it as it is and heap the due praise Vader deserves as he is one of the most talented peeps (IMO) on team 32in24.

I mean, what I'm talking about here is the butterfly effect: the supposed major cumulative effects of the flap of a butterfly's wings. I would hope people can understand how changing the shape of things can fundamentally change the flow and gameplay of the wad and can mean the difference between electrifying gameplay and stagnant, unstimulating gameplay. In 3D space, the certain size and shape of things has a certain, specific desired effect (of which is difficult to articulate into words), and as you change things, that effect changes in major ways. Through years of making so many dm maps, I have developed an acute sensibility and sensitivity to this, and have seen how small, subtle changes in shapes of sectors and various other things can have an averse effect on how a map plays. Look at D5M1--my whole dm mapping philosophy sprung from this map. It would be a sin to alter even in the slightest the shape of that outside area. The shape of that area is a major component to why that map is so fun. Another specific aspect of this is sight lines. If you change the shape of a sector that connects two areas, the sight line is either going to be increased or decreased, and how much you can see from one area to another effects the player's perception of the map being fun and interesting to being boring. If you get it just right, it can have a very positive effect. I definitely haven't mastered this--most maps I make are mediocre, but it is a sensibility of mine I would like preserved when the maps are detailed, as in some cases I do have some success.

Butts: Hyatus4x should be less challenging to preserve its shape as it doesn't really have any irregular shapes to it. Maybe for Swobux you can be okay with a "light" detail job? I think you'd be able to do a heavy detail job on hyatus4x without ruffling too many of my feathers (I have been called a strange bird--but as of yet, not for my dm mapping eccentricities [after reading this I'm sure you all think I'm crazy now])

Butts: I am also very attached to the slightly slanted shapes of things in dw67bx. It's a subtle thing, but it's real. Every ebb and contour has an effect on the player's perception and how players interact in a map.

I think the simplest solution for this project is to let you guys do exactly what you want--instead of this strained compromise to meet halfway where neither party is particularly happy. Release the thing as whatever (greenwar2) and then I go and detail my maps myself and release it as the vanilla version of Greenwar2. Since the maps are being overhauled so much more than I had ever imagined they might be, I think most people will not even realize the two megawads have similar roots.

anyway--keep the dialog going--we'll sort something out.

ok im not really straightening things out by your definition, where its all neat and tidy right angles and so forth, just altering the vertexes a little bit, rounding things off, but everything keeps the same general shape. i havent worked on swobux in a while but it has heavy detail in certain parts, but the general shape and layout is the same (except the outside area has ledges and jumps and such to get the rocket launcher, but i can always redo swobux or any map, not a big deal to me, its just that the public may have to wait a little while longer for greenwar2 to be released. i have no problem adjusting to any circumstances when detailing and will try to do it your way.

Just postin' here to let all know I'm still planning on working on my third my. My little Instagib project is reaching its deadline, so I'm really hoping to finish atleast one more map before then...and afterwards, I still have to see it through to its finish (deadline is Feb. 1st). So yea, I hope that delay isn't going to make me lose that layout...I truthfully plan on detailing it up before this is over :)

Mechadon said:

Just postin' here to let all know I'm still planning on working on my third my. My little Instagib project is reaching its deadline, so I'm really hoping to finish atleast one more map before then...and afterwards, I still have to see it through to its finish (deadline is Feb. 1st). So yea, I hope that delay isn't going to make me lose that layout...I truthfully plan on detailing it up before this is over :)

Cool mechadon. You mean my outrageous dissertation on my perspective on mapping didn't turn you off?

Nah, not at all. I understand where your coming from :)

Mechadon said:

Nah, not at all. I understand where your coming from :)

Thank you it is appreciated. I was beginning to feel like I was on planet Zorg eating dust bunnies as a means for finding mutual understanding and common ground.

I am sorry but I have to leave this project. I have a lack of time and when I have some free time I prefer my other projects that still needs damn amount of work...
Anyway, you have really strong team here so I hope that you will easily finish this project even without noobs who just join and then leave without submitting anything (like me :-/) Good Luck!

Haha, don't worry about it. You're a fair bit short of a noob, I think :P

Just playtested nz12bx.wad with someone who hadn't played the original. We then played the original and we both agreed it played better. So... we're going to have to figure out how to get that wad as close to my original as can be. The playtester was impressed by the detail job tho.

Hellbent said:

Me me me me me me me me me.*Actual, true concern.* Then back to more me me me me me me me me I am so awesome.

Sorry but that's what it seems like to me. As a long time player and mapper myself I can understand most of what you mean, but come on dude, just give it a rest for a bit will you? I thought we made this clear before but I guess not. We're not going to just suddenly release the thing as soon as we have all the maps. There'll be plenty of time to adjust and fix things according to your will, and contrary to your paranoia this IS an equal partnership, you do still have control over your maps and we'll get to it eventually. So just relax duder, this project is having enough problems just getting maps submitted, we don't need added madness on top of it. :P

fair enough. I'll shaddup (for the time being :p)

Heh I got around to finishing dw58fx:




http://www.rottking.unidoom.org/dw58fxrotta.zip

There's still some room for detail here and there but it's finished for the most part.

Well, I am like 95-99% done I think.
Firefmx - Torn
here is one before and one after picture.
Before
after

VERY IMPORTANT UPDATE!

If you have claimed a map but haven't submitted a finished version yet, POST YOUR PROGRESS IN THIS THREAD!

Tell us what your current progress is on your map(s), and whether you plan on finishing them or not.

If you don't post any sort of progress report, it will be assumed that you have no intention of finishing your map, and your mapslot will be dropped so that someone else can claim it.

We've currently got a ton of claimed maps, and very little progress being made on any of them. Dropping people is the only way we can get things moving again.

Again, if you're still working on your map, post your current progress here! If you're not planning on finishing, tell us that too, so we won't feel so bad when we remove you from the list.

(Screenshots and/or a work-in-progress download link would be nice too, but are not required)

I haven't made any progress on my latest slot to speak of, but I'm am planning on working on it once I clear up my current mapping load :)

i am going to drop dw67bx. the other maps i have are... at a slight standstill

I claim dw88bx

Butts said:

i am going to drop dw67bx. the other maps i have are... at a slight standstill

Since Butts is dropping dw67bx, I would like to take that map instead and drop the one I have (la23bX).

essel: I PM'ed you with a more thorough explanation. ;)

I still have my 2 maps and would like to finish them. Haven't been around much, but that's Life™

WHO...

IS...

PUMPED?!

Evidently not many of you!

I know theshooter7 is having computer troubles and may not be able to work on his map anytime soon. He had a map due for IGPack and reported to me that he wouldn't be able to complete it. I'm not speaking for him, but rather just saying that someone might like to have that map if he is not going to be able to work on it. I'm also saying this because I never see him on these forums, heh. Hopefully he won't hate me :(

I uh... guess I could finish... maybe :|

Mechadon said:

I know theshooter7 is having computer troubles and may not be able to work on his map anytime soon. He had a map due for IGPack and reported to me that he wouldn't be able to complete it. I'm not speaking for him, but rather just saying that someone might like to have that map if he is not going to be able to work on it. I'm also saying this because I never see him on these forums, heh. Hopefully he won't hate me :(

I PMed him a few days ago. He dropped one of his maps, and IIRC he said he had a good bit of the other one finished. If he doesn't think he'll be able to finish it himself, maybe he could upload what's done so that someone else can work on it.

Tango said:

I uh... guess I could finish... maybe :|

DO IT FGT >:|