Contest Conversation?

[Obsttorte]

why?

[Shadowhide]

go ahead and make a city that will look as good as in RttC using modules,then you will change my mind

Edited November 14, 2012 by Shadowhide

[Midnight]

I don't think Procedural is the best description of this idea, modular is a better fit. I think this would be a great idea if modular mission design (like Sotha is experimenting with) becomes the norm, but that doesn't seem likely. Sorry to be negative, but it would be a lot of effort to create enough prefabs to make even a single mission from, and the results are likely to be fairly mundane looking (they would have to be to fit the modular design principles).

Edited November 14, 2012 by Midnight

[Melan]

Prefabs are very useful, but entire missions built out of modular parts without significant customisation will get very old very soon. Here is an example: there is a writing bureau prefab which has several small doors, including a secret compartment you open by pulling a small lever. The drawer on the lower right side holds a movable red book, while the one on the lower left side holds a movable copper goblet. Familiar? It should be, because it is found in several missions by now. It is also... not much fun to go through those drawers, finding the same stuff over and over, mission from mission. Imagine an entire mission built out of repeating elements like that.

 

I'm not saying modular components are useless. Windowframes, building parts, furniture, vaulted ceiling... all that has a use. But they should be used very carefully. Also, it is not that hard to make a mission from scratch, even if it will not look 100% on the first try. More people should try it, because it is easy with simple building techniques.

[Obsttorte]

I never wanted to say that all mission should consist only out of such modules

this is a misunderstanding

 

I also don't want to create something like a big prefab library

 

I just experienced that this building style provides some advantages, and that this could be most useful to new/unexperienced mappers

so you could see it as a basic for a new beginners contest

 

I also think that such prefabs are a good tool to provide new mappers with useful informations on how to achieve specific effects in a simple manner

 

OLD HABITS was my ... I don't know 16th approach or so, and there were a lot of cons in the whole layout caused by unexperience and bad building technique

 

so instead of starting completely from scratch beginners would have a good starting point

 

it's just the technique that fascinates me , not what comes out in the end

the latter is up to the mapper IMO

 

go ahead and make a city that will look as good as in RttC using modules,then you will change my mind

 

I'll give it a try when I finished my current FM (in a month or so, hopefully )

Edited November 14, 2012 by Obsttorte

[nbohr1more]

I think this is a grand idea. A contest with modular content will push authors to think of

creative ways to beat the shortcomings of the technique.

[Sotha]

I just wanted to add that in the modular approach one of the main ideas is REUSABILITY. That means that, by design, every decorative geometry piece can be easily cloned and used elsewhere.

 

Melan, it does not necessarily result in always predictable geometries: it is all about how many different module elements the mapper bothers to make, just how the detail level is up to the mapper in the classic mapping style. The big bonus is the simple reusability.

 

I see it perfectly possible to make a good looking mission like RTTC using the approach. For example my modular WIP will be more pretty and detailed than any of my maps before and it will be easier and faster when you consider the detail level.

 

If all many of the AA game (fallout, dxhr to name a few) titles use modular approach why cannot we?

[Obsttorte]

what I may add as it doesn't seem to be perfectly clear hear is, that all I did was to offer a suggestion for a contest, not a doctrine of how to build up missions

 

and I did so because I think it is a good way suitable for attracting new mappers

Edited November 15, 2012 by Obsttorte

[Shadowhide]

If all many of the AA game (fallout, dxhr to name a few) titles use modular approach why cannot we?

first : none of games you mintioned use modular approach

second : AA games sucks even without it

[Sotha]

But of course they do.

 

 

 

Can anyone see some similarity between these concepts?

 

In fallout it was very clear that the all the locations were built from recurring pieces. In DXHR it was obvious too, just go ingame and inspect some toilets!

[Shadowhide]

not sure about fallout (are you talk about fallout1/2 or elder scrolls:fallout ?),but i played dxhr 2 times and levels was the same

[grayman]

Y'all are discussing two different things: modular and procedural. A modular approach means the map is created by the author from reusable parts that are then detailed to hide their modularity as best as possible. A procedural approach creates the map programmatically at mission start from basic rules and definitions.

[lost_soul]

The use of prefabs in level design is an interesting one. When used correctly, it makes the level designer's task an easier one. When overused, you get something like Assault on the Control Room from Halo, where you walk through rooms that look the same over and over again.

 

To the person who mentioned the common desks that are all the same in TDM, surely this could be solved by placing random objects in the droars? I.e. you never know what you'll get, so its still worth the effort of checking.

[Obsttorte]

surely this could be solved by placing random objects in the doors?

 

yup, of course it can, if the mapper isn't to lazy to do that

 

but this is than the fault of the maper, not of the approach

 

btw. yeah, there seem to be a misunderstanding

 

what I've meant in my first post was building maps from modules, so modular, as grayman explained, NOT procedural

I'll change that

 

yet another btw.: mappers also use the same set of textures in all their missions (most commonly), instead of creating new ones for every single map

 

so it is more an expansion of an already established way of working, that CAN if rightly used enfasten the workflow without lacking on eye-candy or atmosphere, so the mapper can take the saved time spending it into special sceneries or enriching the before mentioned

 

you get something like Assault on the Control Room from Halo, where you walk through rooms that look the same over and over again.

 

I've played Halo, too

but as mentioned one of the criterias would be the usage of the prefabs, therefore also the way of hiding/avoiding the repetivity

 

EDIT: changed first post, so now we are talking about a MODULAR MAPPING CONTEST

Edited November 15, 2012 by Obsttorte

[Diego]

Modular and procedurally generated stuff is, at the very least, great as a starting point.

[ungoliant]

My vote is against this contest. It seems restrictive against creativity. Modularity (or procedural generation, either way) should be a tool, not a yoke. It is the means, not the ends.

[Sir Taffsalot]

I dont like the idea of procedural level design. I can see why AA games would use them as they have deadlines to meet and they would certainly speed up the process. From a creative point of view I think it encourages mappers to not think outside the box.

[Melan]

Melan, it does not necessarily result in always predictable geometries: it is all about how many different module elements the mapper bothers to make, just how the detail level is up to the mapper in the classic mapping style. The big bonus is the simple reusability.

 

I see it perfectly possible to make a good looking mission like RTTC using the approach. For example my modular WIP will be more pretty and detailed than any of my maps before and it will be easier and faster when you consider the detail level.

Sure, but the higher the level of complexity you draw the line, the more noticeable the repetition will be. A gothic support is a fairly generic piece of architecture; a tower is more involved, and a whole building with exterior and interior is harder to "sell" as something new. I am not against prefab-based building. Fauchard Street was built that way, and I hoped it would gain a following when people saw how easy it is (which is why I released all the prefabs I used in it). Unfortunately, that didn't happen.

 

But AAA games do have very noticable repetition. Even Dishonored, which I love to pieces, has it.

[Obsttorte]

I can see what you are meaning. But wouldn't such a contest then not be the perfect way how limited in reference to creativity and non-repetivity this approach really is. By now most if not all of the released missions were build up the "traditional" way. So everybody knows that this approach leads to good results. But there are no maps that are almost completely build up from modules.

 

It's hard to make well-founded decision if you only know one of the sites. So if some maps would be made this way, and everything that comes out is just crap, than you can say that modular building is a dead end and we should stay with the old ways.

 

It's more like "I've always browsed on this field, so why should I leave!".

 

IMO we should just give it a try.

[Sotha]

I am not against prefab-based building. Fauchard Street was built that way, and I hoped it would gain a following when people saw how easy it is (which is why I released all the prefabs I used in it). Unfortunately, that didn't happen.

 

Wait. You're saying this has already been done? Did you have a modules based on a standardized grid size or did you have arbitrary sized prefabs? There is a distinct difference between the 'modular approach' and just using prefabs in the building, at least in my view. Just using prefabs is not very efficient, you need to have standard grid size so that any piece fits anywhere in the map.

 

But AAA games do have very noticable repetition. Even Dishonored, which I love to pieces, has it.

 

This could be taken as evidence that the missions made by this modular approach can still be as fun as conventionally mapped missions. That is, the repetition of the objects did not get into your way of enjoying the games. I do believe most of the people will not even notice it.

 

Game companies making AAA games have a lot of more money/paid people doing the work. For a freetime mapper using modules can be a great way to create something with relative ease. Why couldn't we have that?

 

I dont like the idea of procedural level design. I can see why AA games would use them as they have deadlines to meet and they would certainly speed up the process. From a creative point of view I think it encourages mappers to not think outside the box.

 

I fail to understand this outside-the-box-thinking argument. One could as easily argue that the modular approach is out-of-the-box thinking and conventional mapping is not, because the modular way is the new way of thinking about the challenge of mapping. It all depends where you arbitrarily draw the boundaries of your box.

 

Looking at the general tone of the comments, maybe the time is not right for this contest. Yet. People have their doubts, and who can blame them, since there is no existing map in TDM that can be referenced. Maybe it is a good idea to bring this idea back to the table after a full modular mission has been produced and played by the community. After trying the modular approach myself, I'm going to always use it where I can in the future. One might say I don't have the time for conventional mapping anymore and I want to have good-looking results quickly at the expense of variety.

[Melan]

Wait. You're saying this has already been done? Did you have a modules based on a standardized grid size or did you have arbitrary sized prefabs? There is a distinct difference between the 'modular approach' and just using prefabs in the building, at least in my view. Just using prefabs is not very efficient, you need to have standard grid size so that any piece fits anywhere in the map.

Where does inefficiency apply to regular prefabs? In fact, I believe they are

• very efficient, since they save work on basic architectural elements,
  
• and at the same time rather flexibe, precisely since they can are not bound by a gridded layout, and since they combine well into more complex structures.
  

This could be taken as evidence that the missions made by this modular approach can still be as fun as conventionally mapped missions. That is, the repetition of the objects did not get into your way of enjoying the games. I do believe most of the people will not even notice it.

I would not take it as evidence, because it stood out even in an otherwise excellent game. It would be vastly more noticeable in something less involving.

[Sotha]

Where does inefficiency apply to regular prefabs? In fact, I believe they are

• very efficient, since they save work on basic architectural elements,
  
• and at the same time rather flexibe, precisely since they can are not bound by a gridded layout, and since they combine well into more complex structures.
  

 

Both of your bullet comments are true. By inefficiency I meant that for ordinary prefab the same piece will not necessarily fit everywhere. Staying on the grid means the module fits tightly everywhere, which means a nice looking corridor could be built in minutes rather than tens of minutes. Of course there are pros and cons for both methods and I am not arguing that the modular approach is universally superior to any other mapping style, I'm trying to say that it is something to consider trying out. The ultimate result might make it easier to produce nice looking maps by people (like me) who don't like to spend a lot of time to decorate their missions.

[Springheel]

(which is why I released all the prefabs I used in it

 

Are these in the core mod? I don't recall seeing them.

[Diego]

A theme will always present itself as some kind of constraint. Since I'm not a mapper my opinion is irrelevant, but I too find the use of procedurally generated content kind of boring. How about a theme as a gameplay style?

 

The warrior contest! make maps that require the player to use his sword as an important part of the mission. Ghosting contest. Exploration contest. Etc and so on.

[Springheel]

I was thinking about a 'Creative Objective' contest, where your main objective has to be something different than the typical, "Steal special object X". Things like vandalizing the statue in St. Lucia, or humiliating Sykes in A Score to Settle, or destroying the Sphere in Glenham Tower, would be good examples.