Journal #2868
Posted 18 years ago2006-01-02 20:08:17 UTC
I have undergone a radical re-thinking of my own personal mapping philosophy, one that I wanted to share with you all. At a recent LAN party, I witnessed a depressing series of events that made me question the purpose and value of mapping for Half-Life 2:
1. Ichthyosaur's map, based on Stargate series, attracted players totalling a maximum of 4 out of the 11 computers that were capable running HL2 at peak times. The rest played Unreal Tournament.
2. My own map, which I had slaved over for hours upon hours despite the Hammer AppID error of last week, was not played at all.
3. The two people who wanted to play Counter-Strike Source couldn't get a LAN game going because no one else felt confident enough to play (based on previous losses online).
4. Unreal Tournament and StarCraft beat out HL2 for total playtime by a long shot. Even the GameCube hooked up in a separate room attracted more enthusiasm (although no offense to the GC, I love mine to pieces).
I began to question: what is wrong with HL2 and our maps that no one wants to play on them? The answer occurred to me after a while: a combination of thematic inaccessibility and unbalanced gameplay mechanics with the added over-emphasis on graphical excess/accuracy crippled our maps' playability and appeal. The reason more people were attracted to UT comes from the fact that that game is more of a sport, where everyone starts on a relatively level playing field, and where no player is given an overly biased advantage (even newbies overthrew the more advanced players in large groups). The UT maps are also highly conducive to fast-paced yet enjoyable gameplay, and "party game" comes immediately to mind - something that also reminded me of the SSBM tournaments that were going on with the GameCube in the background.
With this in mind, I decided to completely change my mapping philosophy. Multiplayer maps that are just a mish-mash of separate projects do not work; moreover, they produce unbearable lag (such as my second castle level did when combined with my pirate ship, chapel and skyscrapers) that hinders the fluidity of the experience. My new multiplayer maps are being designed from the ground up to enable fair, balanced gameplay across all skill levels. I also will address the unpleasantness of being a player of lesser skill than others in a given battle. I was displeased to have personally been slaughtered despite having tried my best, and after a while, it simply wasn't fun - the whole point of playing the game. What multiplayer levels need are novice-geared handles; that is to say, features within the map that can help newer players turn the tide against higher skilled players while still being fair to everyone.
I personally vow to make all future maps with these aforementioned concerns as my chief considerations, and I implore everyone who makes multiplayer maps to take them to heart when you load up Hammer next time, for the betterment of the HL2 experience of everyone that your work reaches.
1. Ichthyosaur's map, based on Stargate series, attracted players totalling a maximum of 4 out of the 11 computers that were capable running HL2 at peak times. The rest played Unreal Tournament.
2. My own map, which I had slaved over for hours upon hours despite the Hammer AppID error of last week, was not played at all.
3. The two people who wanted to play Counter-Strike Source couldn't get a LAN game going because no one else felt confident enough to play (based on previous losses online).
4. Unreal Tournament and StarCraft beat out HL2 for total playtime by a long shot. Even the GameCube hooked up in a separate room attracted more enthusiasm (although no offense to the GC, I love mine to pieces).
I began to question: what is wrong with HL2 and our maps that no one wants to play on them? The answer occurred to me after a while: a combination of thematic inaccessibility and unbalanced gameplay mechanics with the added over-emphasis on graphical excess/accuracy crippled our maps' playability and appeal. The reason more people were attracted to UT comes from the fact that that game is more of a sport, where everyone starts on a relatively level playing field, and where no player is given an overly biased advantage (even newbies overthrew the more advanced players in large groups). The UT maps are also highly conducive to fast-paced yet enjoyable gameplay, and "party game" comes immediately to mind - something that also reminded me of the SSBM tournaments that were going on with the GameCube in the background.
With this in mind, I decided to completely change my mapping philosophy. Multiplayer maps that are just a mish-mash of separate projects do not work; moreover, they produce unbearable lag (such as my second castle level did when combined with my pirate ship, chapel and skyscrapers) that hinders the fluidity of the experience. My new multiplayer maps are being designed from the ground up to enable fair, balanced gameplay across all skill levels. I also will address the unpleasantness of being a player of lesser skill than others in a given battle. I was displeased to have personally been slaughtered despite having tried my best, and after a while, it simply wasn't fun - the whole point of playing the game. What multiplayer levels need are novice-geared handles; that is to say, features within the map that can help newer players turn the tide against higher skilled players while still being fair to everyone.
I personally vow to make all future maps with these aforementioned concerns as my chief considerations, and I implore everyone who makes multiplayer maps to take them to heart when you load up Hammer next time, for the betterment of the HL2 experience of everyone that your work reaches.
Comments
You must log in to post a comment. You can login or register a new account.