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

Which rules would you want to see more often in community projects?

Recommended Posts

I never understood the need to limit mappers to the vanilla engine. Just specify "limit removing", and you get the best of both worlds - no gimmicky Boom or ZDoom features, and no VPOs.

Share this post


Link to post

Can't think of anything, really... But I'd like to see more megawads that make smart use of the stock textures, and limit-removing ones too.

Share this post


Link to post

All kinds of restrictions. Because it motivates authors to look for other interesting approaches. It also greatly enhances the mapping experience.

Share this post


Link to post

I vaguely toyed with the idea of starting one centered on the theme of "be evil".  Basically all sorts of tropes that are typically considered "unfair", "fake difficulty", "bullshit" etc. would be encouraged as centerpoints of the map designs.  Pop-up chaingunners?  Sure.  Mandatory secrets? Go for it (on the probable stipulation that there's SOME hint and not just wallhump-city.)  Surprise traps that aren't choreographed in the usual ways?  Do it.  Chasm-style tightroping over inescapable pits of death?  YES! YES!

 

The two added stipulations would be that it has to be presentable as a "serious" map outside those elements and that it has to be beatable without resorting to TAS and the like.  So it wouldn't just be another "lawl deliberately bad maps" jokewad but something more like a Kaizo Mario type thing.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Interesting that "more vanilla maps, less GZDoom" is always mentioned in these types of discussions, since I actually don't see many GZDoom community projects besides DUMP and JOM (which are both newbie-oriented projects anyway). I, for one, would like to see another project similar to ZPack or something like that.

Share this post


Link to post

I think rule 1 is really good, not so much because is fun to beat your map, but also it ensures the map is balanced correctly, so i think it's a good practice for a CP to have mappers submit a demo along with the map.
Restriction rules are fun to get around and make the best out of them, so i enjoy mapping with a Vanilla rule too, i like mapping there since it forces you to be creative to get around the limits, and you start to rely more on architecture to create more interesting places instead of detail. And also because i love to play the maps on chocolate doom hehe
 
That said, i would like to see more GZDoom friendly CP's since we don't really see many projects of that type often, and it's cool to see what kind of maps people are able to make once the limits are removed.

Share this post


Link to post

Any rule that encourages creative designs rather than rehearsing the same gameplay we've been making for 25 years. Examples include the various 'limited linedefs/sectors' projects, rules that enforce a specific monster (i.e. my Iconography project, which enforces an Icon of Sin, or rather spawn shooter, in every level) or sector type (say, at least half sectors need to be damaging floor)

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

A good rule

terrible. fuck vanilla limits, they're the most mapper unfriendly thing that exists. Working around visplane crashes sucks.

terrible.

 

^THIS.

First point is good as it means mappers won't make stupidly unfair scenarios. A mapper that is not able to UV-max his/her OWN map (despite knowing the layout 100% and the best strategy) means that the map is extremely unfair

 

Points 2 and 3 are terrible tho. Why should a mapper restrict himself artistically?

 

3 hours ago, Nancsi said:

4) Involved mappers should make clusters or episodes of the said megawad with some kind of bossy conclusion at the end of the clusters

 

The more people involved in a megawad, the more chaotic it will be without any kind of direction and sense of progress. Let's have like 7 mappers. 6 of them do 5-5 level clusters, and 1 make two secrets. That would give a megawad an interesting flow.

 

This is a very very good idea. It solves the problem of inconsistent quality (cough *TNT Evilution* cough).

This could work even better if each mappers episode has it own distinct artistic/visual direction (kinda like the episodes in Valiant and Eviternity)

Share this post


Link to post

No map-spot hogging (I'm looking at you map01). Contributors vote over each map spot after viewing submitted final demos. :]

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, TheMightyHeracross said:

 

Interesting that "more vanilla maps, less GZDoom" is always mentioned in these types of discussions, since I actually don't see many GZDoom community projects besides DUMP and JOM (which are both newbie-oriented projects anyway). I, for one, would like to see another project similar to ZPack or something like that.

Exactly that. There are barely any zdoom community projects going on, and people are still pressing for more vanilla wads, which are currently flooding this community, and I can't bring myself to care about any of them.

To answer your request TheMightyHerracross, one gzdoom project that was a thing in 2018 is Verse Hopper: https://www.doomworld.com/idgames/levels/doom2/Ports/megawads/versehop

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, TheMightyHeracross said:

 

Interesting that "more vanilla maps, less GZDoom" is always mentioned in these types of discussions, since I actually don't see many GZDoom community projects besides DUMP and JOM (which are both newbie-oriented projects anyway). I, for one, would like to see another project similar to ZPack or something like that.

 

I completely agree. Relatively few community projects are full-blown GZDoom/UDMF. If anything I'd like to see more.

 

7 hours ago, Roofi said:

 

2) Maps must be vanilla-compatible

 

I can't say I agree with this. I just did a map for a vanilla comp community project and while it was a fun limitation to have a go at once, going through after the fact and removing individual lines in an attempt to squeeze under an arbitrary set of limits is the antithesis of what I find enjoyable about mapping.

Share this post


Link to post

1.I agree that mappers must test their maps on UV-MAX strictly.

2.I don't see anything wrong in Boom format, but gzDoom does not work for some people.

3.Why to stick to old textures??? They are nice, but forever the same?

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, NiGHTMARE said:

I never understood the need to limit mappers to the vanilla engine. Just specify "limit removing", and you get the best of both worlds - no gimmicky Boom or ZDoom features, and no VPOs.

Some of us get a boner from the idea of stuff being able to be played on choco/dos.Don't know why though xD

Share this post


Link to post

My rule: playtest your fucking maps from start to end, show me that a UV max without getting out of resources is possible and is possible to play from pistol start.

Don't submit slaughtermaps or maps full of crap which makes them impossible to save from start in Vanilla

Share this post


Link to post

I never knew being a speed runner was a requirement for level design. I guess I should head off and go back to my Vortilevels that no one Vorticares about. (I'm not at all Vortibitter.)

 

I make statement now: Not all levels have to be UV-MAXable! Not all levels have to built around the one true difficultytm. Do not all true Doomer paradox me!

 

Speaking of paradoxes, The assertion that only good players can make good maps is not one I can logically agree with. Yes, better player may better know game. Knowing game better allows one to be better at game or better at mapping. Doesn't imply either though. And the converse sure is not true.

 

A lot of great ideas itt though. Maybe once I actually start mapping I might make an EECP of the other spectrum mentioned by Not Jabba. But I thought Metaternity was a better start as a new project lead. If I do, I'm not going to do the whole map sign-up thing. I personally think the map order should follow map creation, not the opposite. So better not to set these things in stone. Although I see merit in episode sign-up.

 

Of course the rules of a CP should be tailored to the desired end-goal, obviously. All others are missing the mark. So I'd love to see more CP like DMP2018, not those rules, but the spirit. Getting mappers out of their comfort zones. Let's make a CP for a lesser loved engine guys, and lesser loved games. Where's the Chex Doomsday project? Or something actually funny, I am not comedian. (Although a SVE CP sounds like a good idea.)

 

Oh, and I'd like to see difficulty level support required. I'm tired of maps that only have three difficulty levels. It's not too late, make it five!

Edited by PaquoCastor

Share this post


Link to post

I would like to see more collaboration based cp's in the vein of Mutiny, I think that kind of system brings the best out of mappers and stimulates a lot of new ideas. I am considering running a cp like this at some point myself. 

 

It would also be good to see more cp leaders be pretty strict with quality control, that kind of approach is worth it in the long run in my opinion - especially when projects such as DWMP and JOM exist to provide opportunities for people to take part in 'accessible' projects. 

Share this post


Link to post

I don't intend to partake in a community project ever again, but what I'd like to see more of is as follows:

  • (G)ZDoom projects - vanilla is terrible to work with and we've done limit-removing to death. Even an advanced Boom project would be something exciting at this point
  • Forcing mappers to be able to beat their own map
  • Stopping the interruption of a reasonable map set with Slaughter maps
  • Adventures - either map sets with a plot, or individual maps that take you on a journey. We've pretty much mastered the mechanical depths of Doom in this community, so why not pair that with a story, interesting environment or some kind of thematic progression?

 

I guess some kind of official-feeling Community Chest 5 would potentially drag me out of retirement, but I've got a New Year's Resolution to keep...

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, DJVCardMaster said:

My rule: playtest your fucking maps from start to end, show me that a UV max without getting out of resources is possible and is possible to play from pistol start.

What if the mapper is that good on the game and the tester is bad at it?.

Besides, the mapper can place things according to each skill, and the mapper is not obligated to post a demo of the map. First, let the testers do it themselves, do the respective feedback...and THEN the mapper can show them how it's done if necessary or tell them what to do if it's lost or something.

And that can be related to the first rule posted in the OP.

 

Second rule? in my case, I disagree limiting yourself. Sorry.

Third rule? That depends exclusively of the theme that the CP want to use. Personally, I don't mind doing a map with stock textures or not. It was proven a LOT of times that stock or custom, maps can be brilliant overall.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, leodoom85 said:

the mapper is not obligated to post a demo of the map.

the whole point of having a rule that says mappers need to provide a demo is to make it such that mappers are obligated to provide a demo

Share this post


Link to post
  • While I enjoy CP's that are collections of random maps, both with and without common elements, I also like CPs for which there is a push to have a coherent story and progression underlying the maps.
  • I like the concept of requiring a map to have a demo. I don't agree with demanding that the author record a UV demo or a UV-Max demo. If you allow for the author to submit a demo at any difficulty level, that's fine. If the requirement is that someone record a UV or UV-Max demo (like the Slaughtermax rule set), that's fine. Having a demo proves that the level is at least beatable and somewhat balanced. But forcing me to tone down a higher difficulty level (that I wouldn't normally play) just so that I can finish it without cheating or saving does no one any favors.
  • I like limits in mapping projects, whether they're vanilla mapping, a certain number of lines or sectors, only 1 monster, only 10 textures, etc. Free-for-alls are OK, too, but I like the rules to impose some sort of limit. I understand people not wanting to limit their creativity, but I say that sometimes the creativity can come out of being limited in some way.
    • By the way, when I say limits, I don't necessarily mean vanilla limits. Perhaps restrictions would be the better term. While I don't personally map for UDMF or ZDoom, I think you can still have some restrictions in place with them.
  • I like unified resource packs, whether they're stock resources, a well-known texture pack (CC4-tex, AA-tex, Zoontex, etc.), or some sort of custom compilation.
  • I like rules that require that all difficulty levels be supported.
  • I like maps that are designed for continuous play (but still beatable from pistol start). I realize that normally takes forethought about where the map would be placed and may require adjustments after a map order is established.

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
×