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

How should a first map ever released by someone look like?

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Tracer said:

For your first ever WAD, I don't think you should share it on the forum for everyone to play.

Sweet son of a strawberry flavored pepermint, I don't even think it would be LEGAL to share my FIRST OF TEH FIRSTEST wad I made (for everyone's sanity).

 

I just want everyone to see what I am made of. Judging by the number of files in my folder, this would be my 40th or so wad to make. I am counting in experimental stuff, failed stuff, and actual stuff that could pass if it weren't for stolen assets.

 

This one would be something I could claim as my "abomination", not a mashup of diffrent stuff or a glitchefest (or bland obstacle courses).

Share this post


Link to post

Not exactly answering the question but try to do a lot of ideas (particularly all the little ones) that you can think of early on in mapping if possible before you get "pro". When visiting some of my first maps I see some cool ideas that I would have never thought of before or would do now that I have more experience otherwise. Sort of like getting less creative as you grow older and know more about how the world works. So embrace thy beginnings and look back upon them and be inspired by thou own handiwork. So for your first maps just let loose and do whatever you think would be fun and cool without getting caught in the stress of worrying if it's all just horribly wrong :s

Share this post


Link to post

It should look like a 1994 level, mostly flush with amazement at being able to edit Doom _at all_.

In my defence, it _was_ 1994.

Share this post


Link to post

The last thing I want to see from someone's first map is just a mapper spinning the ol' wheels of what a typical map is. Starting room. Shotgun. Some imps and zombies, with a  pinkie thrown in for good measure. A door leading to another room, maybe linked by a corridor. This room has a window with some imps in it and probably a secret armour. Everything has been on the 32-unit grid, and everything is 128/256 units high, and 128/256 units wide. You get the idea.

 

Don't just spin your wheels. This is meant to be a creative endeavor!

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, an_mutt said:

The last thing I want to see from someone's first map is just a mapper spinning the ol' wheels of what a typical map is. Starting room. Shotgun. Some imps and zombies, with a  pinkie thrown in for good measure. A door leading to another room, maybe linked by a corridor. This room has a window with some imps in it and probably a secret armour. Everything has been on the 32-unit grid, and everything is 128/256 units high, and 128/256 units wide. You get the idea.

 

Don't just spin your wheels. This is meant to be a creative endeavor!

So like, two pinkies instead of just one? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, Battle_Kirby said:

Guys, a terrible update.

 

I was midway of making a good map. Not too detailed but not exactly Wolfenstein 3d either.

 

I had planned it all out. Made a sketch, made a short story about it (my practice as a aspiring writer), and made a draft of a map on Slade, everything was fine and dandy.

 

And just before I saved, the editor crashed.

 

How do you guys deal with this............

.......feeling.......?

Not sure this will work with Slade but try going into windows explorer where your level editor is, find your level and see if there's any version of your level with the following extension to the filename:   .wad.backup#    If so rename the most recent file (this will have the highest numerical value) to just have a .wad extension.   This has worked for me in the past.

Share this post


Link to post

First map must have some positive and negative reviews from other players, this can help mapper to improve his skill!

Share this post


Link to post

It should definitely have about 10-20 monsters (types depend on your skill), 5 to 10 rooms, 30 to 50 health bonuses and armor bonuses, multiple types of ammo (about 10 or so boxes and clips, shells, cells, etc.), 2 or 3 secrets with a map, soulsphere, or something really useful in them, doors to each room, 1 or 2 key activated rooms, keycards, many textures, 5 to 10 barrels (or more depending on map type), lights and other sprites like that, an exit room, a switch room, a few traps*, and a super shotgun. It may seem like a lot, but that is what is needed.

*If you watched some tutorials then add a lift and if you are real good, a teleport.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, PhillMcHogan said:

It should definitely have about 10-20 monsters (types depend on your skill), 5 to 10 rooms, 30 to 50 health bonuses and armor bonuses, multiple types of ammo (about 10 or so boxes and clips, shells, cells, etc.), 2 or 3 secrets with a map, soulsphere, or something really useful in them, doors to each room, 1 or 2 key activated rooms, keycards, many textures, 5 to 10 barrels (or more depending on map type), lights and other sprites like that, an exit room, a switch room, a few traps*, and a super shotgun. It may seem like a lot, but that is what is needed.

*If you watched some tutorials then add a lift and if you are real good, a teleport.

 

10-20 monsters isn't much all. You need to be pretty experienced to wring something substantive out of that. 30-100 is more representative of the low monster count a small-ish map might have. 

 

Room count isn't really a good way to measure the amount of content in a map. A lot of strong layout types eschew traditional rooms almost entirely, in favor of what one might refer to as 'areas'. 

 

Health and armor bonuses are fine, but you don't really need them, and 30-50 is an oddly specific count. Ammo variety is cool, but 10 or so of each of those things might be a lot for such a small monster count. 5-10 barrels is an oddly specific count. 

 

I'd strongly advise against connecting each "room" with a door. Perfunctorily used doors are basically always bad for gameplay. Outside of key doors maybe, I'd recommend Battle_Kirby use relatively few doors, probably even none. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, rdwpa said:

 

10-20 monsters isn't much all. You need to be pretty experienced to wring something substantive out of that. 30-100 is more representative of the low monster count a small-ish map might have. 

 

Room count isn't really a good way to measure the amount of content in a map. A lot of strong layout types eschew traditional rooms almost entirely, in favor of what one might refer to as 'areas'. 

 

Health and armor bonuses are fine, but you don't really need them, and 30-50 is an oddly specific count. Ammo variety is cool, but 10 or so of each of those things might be a lot for such a small monster count. 5-10 barrels is an oddly specific count. 

 

I'd strongly advise against connecting each "room" with a door. Perfunctorily used doors are basically always bad for gameplay. Outside of key doors maybe, I'd recommend Battle_Kirby use relatively few doors, probably even none. 

 

 

Hmm, now that I think about it you are right. I was thinking in the view of my experience, first maps are usually small and do not have many enemies. The large amounts of ammo and such are for the next levels (if made).

Share this post


Link to post

It shouldn't "look" any particular way. IMO Doom mapping is entirely creative and so you can ultimately do what the fuck you want. The most important thing is to use your own initiative and personality to determine what you think constitutes quality, and don't compromise on that no matter what. Sometimes it takes time to understand your own influences and style and that's fine. Use maps you love as a yardstick and strive to create things of similar quality. If you make something and play it, then feel like it sucks, then it probably does and so work on it some more. Playtesting your own work extensively is crucial and it is obvious when mappers don't do that.

Share this post


Link to post

I suggest using Holy Hell as a starting point. A first map should have at least 6000 monsters.

 

Actually, don't -- I'm only kidding.

 

I haven't done much mapping, but I concur with those using Scythe as a model. Small, simple, non-linear map layout; interesting encounters without being too difficult... This allows you to flex your creative muscles and show off what you might be capable of, without alienating any part of the community by having levels that are too long, complex, hard, slaughterey, etc.

Share this post


Link to post

I would basically recommend the opposite regarding difficulty: feel free to make it as hard as you can handle while having fun. As an extension of what Scotty said, if you like easy maps, make those, but if you like hard maps, make those instead. I think curtailing length and complexity for a first map is a good idea since it's useful to get maps out there in the first place, but saying 'don't make it hard and slaughtery' is kind of like saying 'don't make maps with the color red'. It's a subjective quality and it may or many not be part of what you like in maps, and tbh there is no point making maps that YOU don't like, regardless of what anyone else feels about them.

 

I also think it's potentially harmful advice without being elaborated on further. 95% of new mappers' maps are somewhat easy even when they attempt to make them challenging! So, many such mappers who try to rein in the difficulty FURTHER will end up with maps that are just blah and unengaging. So, further clarification is needed: That is, there is a huge difference between maps that are easy because they actively softball the threat level, and maps that are easy because the numerous credible dangers in the map can be handled comfortably through a combination of resources, map features, smart play, or whatever else. So, inasmuch as you try to curb the difficulty, favor the latter: danger and surprise is a good thing, and it can exist even in the easiest maps! 


 

 

Edited by rdwpa

Share this post


Link to post

What does, "Released" mean? I think of it as getting your map on idgames. 

 

It should be short.  probably suck still and no one wants to spend more than ten minutes in one 's shitty map.

 

One should do their best to get good and play lots of 4—5 star rated maps and beat them. Sometimes this means spending a few hours playing one map. One shan't complain about difficult maps because that is annoying.

 

A first released map should demonstrate a knowledge of monster AI, and exploit the strengths and weaknesses of the monsters.

 

It should be fun for you to play.

 

Learn. Mapping is a talent and it doesn't come naturally. Everything is about learning, but anyone who has looked up how a door works,  or takes the time to read tutorials, knows this. It goes way beyond this, however. Monster movement can be be obstructed by certain architecture, compatibility in different ports needs to be understood and more. 

 

When your mapping primally comes from memory, then you tend to start making meaningful decisions about your map instead of,  "I want a door here because I wan't to make a cool door."

 

Your first map should look like you care. 

 

I still haven't released a map yet, so I might not have the greatest point of view.  

 

I forgot about my piece of crap In DUMP 3.

Edited by everennui

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, everennui said:

What does, "Released" mean? I think of it as getting your map on idgames. 

 

Post on the forums, maybe at least one beta cycle. I consider that a 'release', especially considering the current state of idgames (troll reviewers, 0* brigades, etc.). 

 

9 hours ago, everennui said:

A first released map should demonstrate a knowledge of monster AI, and exploit the strengths and weaknesses of the monsters.

 

Agreed, and this is another reason the map shouldn't be deliberately easy. Part of using monsters well is in learning how to use their specific qualities to create engaging scenarios. 

 

 

Edited by rdwpa

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, rdwpa said:

Post on the forums, maybe at least one beta cycle. I consider that a 'release',

You would ;D

Share this post


Link to post
On 18.3.2017 at 5:59 PM, Jayextee said:

I dare say it can be as basic or as terrible as it can be, as long as the mapper is willing to take on board feedback (especially from more experienced mappers). After all, it's a first map. First maps are very rarely anything other than a piece of shit, but it's somewhere to start.

This in a nutshell. I care fairly little for how a first effort looks or plays, but I do care for an author being willing to take constructive criticism and improve upon their work.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, everennui said:

I guess I see what you're saying. I'd call it a release, but not a Release. A forum thread to me is more of an avenue to let something die most of the time.

Content qualifies as released once it became publicly available, that's all. It doesn't matter where it was made available and how long it will stay available there (to satisfy the definition of being released, I mean, of course it does matter for practical reasons).

Share this post


Link to post

There's no arguing about it. If you made someone a tutorial map for an elevator - that's your first release. Micheal Jackson's first release was when he was two and his aunt filmed him at a birthday party and showed it to friends at work. D. A. Levy's was a haiku he wrote on a double bubble wrapper.

Edited by everennui

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, everennui said:

There's no arguing about it. If you made someone a tutorial map for an elevator - that's your first release. Micheal Jackson's first release was when he was two and his aunt filmed him at a birthday party and showed it to friends at work. D. A. Levy's was a haiku he wrote on a double bubble wrapper.

So according to that my first public released map would be a glitchinfested wad that wouldn't even turn up and no one had ever seen nor had a chance to see it, yet play.

 

And these are maps ffs, I can choose to train myself for 30 years and design the bestest Doom map ever that would even make John Romero go "holy ducking shippe my career is a joke compared to this" and that would be my first release, that is, if no one ever had a chance to play all the experimental wads beforehand. I mean, no one is forcing me like "Where is your first wad you son of a biscuit I have to release it or I will blown your brains out".

 

Sorry for my angery response and thanks for tolerating my shit.

Share this post


Link to post

Why not just make something decent, have your friends play it and make recommendations, fix anything that needs it, and then release the result? It doesn't have to be worthy of Skillsaw or Erik Alm to be a decent "first release."

 

I'd play it. :-)

Share this post


Link to post

Your (first) map(s) should be something that YOU enjoy playing through and creating. This seems to be what many other mappers do, and having somewhat gone through the mapping process myself (I'm still working on my debut map for DMP2017), I now understand this mindset also.

 

You'll probably be influenced by certain wads/mappers; I myself have always appreciated Going Down and mouldy's style of mapping, creating carnage-fuelled situations whilst allowing the player to move around freely in order to earn their space to fight in. Whatever has inspired you or influenced you from the Doom community, feel free to use that in your map. Heck, many Doom mappers down the years have probably copied many a trick from other maps and mappers as inspiration.

 

Gameplay is the most important thing though. Detailing comes afterwards. It's easier to fix up some detailing errors than to fix bad gameplay situations.....

Share this post


Link to post

Have fun creating the map and use any criticism as inspiration to improve.

Share this post


Link to post

The process of making and playing it yourself being fun is the most important thing for me as well.

 

Also when I play someone's map, I'd like to see what they wanted to create and not what someone else made them do or what they did only to please other people that could potentially dislike their original idea.

That doesn't mean that a mapper shouldn't accept criticism, but when it's not about objective flaws / oversights and instead wants you to change your whole idea or the style of your map (theme, length, difficulty, design of encounters etc.), then I don't recommend following that advice, because there may be other people besides you that enjoy that style of map and like it exactly as it is.

Share this post


Link to post

With all this discussion, I'm starting to think we should just say "Your first map should be a single square room with a cyderdemon in".

 

Get those first-map-pressures out the way and concentrate on making the second map great.

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

×