I love you Dennis.

As much as your blatant neutral standpoint on every single argument annoys me, huge ass maps (no pun intended) do not work on this game. When you have a map 3KM from corner to corner and 16 players to work with, you have a slow paced, boring game. People purchase (or pirate) this game to shoot and kill people, not flying through each corner of the map with a jet trying to search for people to kill.

When you have smaller, symmetrical maps, people have the ability to play the game the way it is best played. Take Hang Em' High with 12 players for example: encounters are quicker, and you don't have to walk 3KM to find another player to shoot and kill. The success of a video game can entirely rely on this.

I understand that your neutrality on everything (for whatever reason) enforces you to give me BS compromises like the one you just gave me, cut and pasted with modifications here and there, but that's just not how the world functions.


Edited by AGLion on Apr 18, 2011 at 01:04 AM

No, his map wasnt cancelled, he just left this specific forum

god some of u guys r freaking annoying, the name issue/discussion was over about 3 pages ago, it went forever, words were said, nothing was resolved, like i said about 6 pages ago, this is for sel n gonzo to sort out privately. for nick to come on here and try n bring it up again is ridiculous. and now talking about which maps are better, big ones or small ones?
come on guys, this is sels map thread, wanna start a discussion on something else, go make ur own thread then u can post in there all u like, go absolutely nutz, but u wont cause u know no-one wants to read ur rubbish so u come in here n dump ur crap. not cool. stick to the topic.

Coming from a sniper and Demolition and a Heavy assault person... This map might not be all that bad. But how much thought goes into it doesn't matter a whole lot. If it looks pretty and has big gun's it's gonna be loved. One reason so called "5KM boxes" are so popular is because there is so much to explore. Also great for testing large weapons....

And with Gonzo's Requiem he has both large gameplay and CQB areas. If you read his thread you will understand what I mean.

*peeks into thread*

The bsp is looking pretty nice. I don't particularly care for MP in general.

*runs away*

Big maps can be fun... Who said the point was to balance and actually kill each other on the big maps? I mean heck, if the maps were meant to be played the way halo was designed to be played, the designers (aka Tiamat and Whoever made Extinction) would have made the maps 1/2 as big, at least.

edit:
Anyone who "hates" the big maps is just mad that the maps they like to play on don't get played, ever, except possibly in the case of CMT-Snowgrove.
Edited by Dwood on Apr 18, 2011 at 01:55 PM
Edited by Dwood on Apr 18, 2011 at 01:56 PM

The maps run just fine and many people play them and like to play them, it may not be what you like but that does not invalidate the fun others have by playing on large maps.

I am not neutral, I am just not blindly biased by my emotions. You apparently don't like large maps which is fine but to claim superiority over people that do is unenlightened hubris. Your categorization of fun in the game is purely subjective and valid only for you. Your argument boils down to "the only fun maps are small fast-paced competitive maps" when the reality is that many people like large random style play that is offered in large maps and that is supported by 1) the number of downloads and 2) the number of servers running them. If you claimed that the only fun maps for you were small fast paced maps I would have nothing to say but you didn't you extended your own bias to other people and all I have done is shown you that your argument is invalid.

The fun players have on large maps is no less important to them than the fun you have on small fast paced maps and you are no more important than they are.

Edited by Dennis on Apr 18, 2011 at 02:28 PM

We are talking about two different things here. What I am taking about is what people find as "fun" and the fact that people define it in different ways. I am not arguing that the way a large map and small map are played is different, they obviously are but the fun derived by people who play a large or small map is also different and neither is "better" than the other it is just different. You and AGLion, however, are trying to define and restrict what should be fun for others and I am saying that you can't nor should you try. Any more than I should impose my personal bias on the maps I host.

The longevity of the Halo CE game is in part because people can create any style map they want and find an audience for them. Be they large or small, fast or random play the key has been that what ever people find as fun they can either find it here or make it themselves.

Fun can't be contained nor can it be restricted by edict. I have joined servers running small and stock maps, where people were role playing and I have joined servers playing large maps were they were seriously playing CTF or KOTH it may not be fun for you but it was for them. You an AGLion are saying that those people should not have been having fun that way but that is not the case. I am not arguing that what you find fun is invalid what I am saying is that what others find as fun is just as valid as what you find as fun. Neither should disparage the other.

(No fair on the double post Dennis...)

So are there any more updates on it? What WILL be the final name anyway? Just wondering about if your gonna keep Requiem or use whatever the other one was.

This map makes decent eye candy though. Still haven't played it yet so yeah... probably should...
/rambeling

You only got two out of three correct.

Ima going with "old" as the incorrect one.

I still don't get where or how I'm saying people can't have fun on large maps.

He is 57 I believe?

Source:
http://forum.halomaps.org/index.cfm%3Fpage=topic&topicID=14258

I'm going with "coot" as the incorrect one.

Right here in this paragraph you injected your bias for small maps. It is not for you, or anyone, to determine "how the game is played best". You can only say how you like to play it best not dictate how others should.

Sorry about that, no need for flamewars, alright so anyways will the map be protected?

As usual, all the assets that I have permission to release, will be released alongside. (though most of them, the doors namely, are already available.

Just like rev, I will also be releasing the map's model files so that everyone can hopefully learn off them too.

Just played the Alpha don't know if you have fixed this yet but if you jump off the map you land with out dieing.

In other words, Entertainment is relative to the person it entertains.
There are some people who enjoy large maps for the freedom, Crysis originally shipped with various huge maps some of which rivalled both Hugeass and coldsnap.
For as long as there is a audience and a market I'm willing to wager there will still be levels created to fill the gaps.

That actually is posibly the best way to remind me something that could be used to destroy all of this flaming

If anybody here has ever played Crysis MP, and i dont mean Crysis wars, You would understand a bit more what Dennis and Rasillion here are pointing out

Crysis has some huge maps, and i mean HUGE. Look through a playthrough of Mesa on that game. Though it has that "you gotta look for the enemies to kill them" style of gameplay, it doesnt stop it from being the #1 most played on map i've seen in that game. It was designed in a way that not only are there huge vast areas where a tank or a jeep would be the best choice, but there's also constrictive air space where you can barely fly a VTOL through, and infact, there's even places where its so constrictive that you can barely fit 3 people through the road at once. Thats the balance that it puts out. That is exactly why people love it so much compared to the other maps that it ships with: it has a huge expanse space to drive and fly around in, there's small channels where you cant drive through and might eventually have to go through on foot, and there's very wide areas where you can sprint up to near the top of the map and snipe from (God is that annoying)

With that being said, you have to also look at the smaller maps, such as the chinese gardens level or the armada level. Both are decently small and require very little searching, but both have atleast one large area where you can freely move around, though without a vehicle as none spawn on either map

enough blabbing-
TLDR: If you can find a way to balance out a Huge map with a bunch of close quarters areas like Gonzo is attemptng (and succeeding) at doing, Then you can just as easily make his map have the same amount of gameplay and fun stylings of SeL's map

P.S.: I know for a fact you're gonna troll me for stating that Gonzo's map could possible match and or exceed SeL's map, but you have to face facts, there are things that you can do that could make each map amazing. (Directed mainly at you SeL, as i know the trolling shall not cease for a little while [as i've noted to what you've said to Gonzo and Dennis])

God i hate writing huge paragraphs, cant we just get this over with?

What, read my post again please.

Also no, you're wrong. Just because some player enjoys hugeass or whatever does not suddenly make hugeass equal to danger canyon in terms of gameplay quality. That's the most ridiculous thing I can possibly imagine, and not to mention obviously wrong.

To quote Idra, not all opinions are created equal.

There are those that matter, and those that don't, and the standard player's opinion, probably matters the least of all.

I'm not sure whether you can't see this because you're not a designer who has to think of think of these kind of things all the time, but it's obvious that we have completely different points of view on the matter (and by your logic would both be correct, which is obviously impossible in this case)

Either way I don't really see a point in discussing it any further since I doubt there's anything we can do to convince each other.



Dear lord, hold on while I tally the terrible analogies in this thread, because here's another one.

First off, Crysis is a far newer game than halo, second off, it was DESIGNED to handle those kinds of levels.

Second, it sucked. The gameplay was awful in those huge maps. The smaller ones offered a significantly better gameplay experience (mostly because all the flying vehicles were totally broken balancewise).

Edited by SeL on Apr 20, 2011 at 12:28 AM

I like big maps. What are you guys arguing about?

Again, you're stating your opinion as a fact. Maybe you thought it sucked, but he obviously stated that the big maps were the most popular maps in the game. If they're so popular, then people obviously enjoyed playing them. And don't say that standard player's opinions don't matter, that's like saying that the entire US population's votes for a new president don't matter, but whoever congress decides to elect.
Edited by nick347b on Apr 20, 2011 at 01:23 AM

I never said all maps are created equal however subjective fun is. If you define "game play" as random RPG non combat then a small map is definitely bad for game play.

No actually your point of view is just narrowly focused. I have been designing both hardware and software since the early 70's and have generated 8 patents for the companies I worked for. I am accustom to looking at things from multiple angles. You are defining fun and good game play based on your own bias and denigrating any other style as wrong, when in fact it isn't it is just different and evidence is there to be seen.

There is nothing wrong with creating a small action packed for competitive game play type map just as there is nothing wrong with creating a wide open left to the imagination game play type map. Once you denigrate the other you have narrowed you mind to possibilities which is a fatal flaw when you are a designer.

I am not saying you have to like other type of game play or the maps that are created for it, but those types of maps and game play styles are just as valid. There are allot of maps I don't like that people like to play but that doesn't mean that they are not having fun on them because I don't like them. Hell if you go by the hard numbers the large custom maps are the favored style because they have the most downloads.

If you are going to be a designer of any kind you have to keep your mind open to all possibilities so that when you decide on a direction you can evaluate the trade-offs you have made. Dismissing options out of personal bias is bad business and a sign of a narrow mind.

Hey Sel! Free your mind and the rest will follow. Map looking good.

You know exactly what meaning of the word I'm using, and you're using irrelevant examples of variations on that to try to prove your point. Sure, there might be parallels but they are very far from the same thing.

Also no, I'm not condemning all other styles as wrong. I'm condemning one, which after seeing in action for the last five years I can say it has never brought forward any gameplay value (You know exactly what I mean) other than gimmicky fun. As I said before that's totally fine, but that doesn't make them good, and it never will.



I'm confused, valid how? Valid as in halo will execute them, or valid as in they exist just as much as other gametypes? Valid as in equal in gameplay quality, haha, I hope not.



Yes, you're obviously right here, but that's not what I'm doing at all. I'm dismissing a map type, that after five years of seeing in action I have concluded does not work in halo nearly well enough to be worth anything, and so far, no one has done anything that has come remotely close to challenging this.
Edited by SeL on Apr 20, 2011 at 09:24 AM
Edited by SeL on Apr 20, 2011 at 09:26 AM

Small maps are great fun, yes. However, I personally find one flaw in the gameplay. Small maps require no strategy, and can get boring after a while. I play on small maps rarely as all that happens on them is people shoot randomly, usually miss, then get hit in the back. Not that fun for me, but that's just my opinion.

Large maps however can be great fun, IF administrated properly. I'll admit hugeass, coldsnap, and the likes can be incredibly boring if there are nuke noobs and the likes all over servers. But I have been on a few servers which have been administrated properly, and have been great fun. Large maps with good players require great strategy. Yes, the majority of servers are filled with noobs that just fly around in jets and die every five minutes, but some servers are filled with good players who sneak, snipe, seek, and the likes. This results in smooth gameplay, that in my opinion is a massive improvement over gameplay on small maps.

Your entire post is flawed. First of all, "small maps require no strategy" is completley false. It depends on the map and the level designer on whether or not the map uses some sort of strategy or not, and in most cases all maps do. The problem with those big maps is this: their big, open, and in most cases are just flying or driving some vehicle around and whoever aims best or see's the speck that you are on the screen first- wins. I'm pretty that "strategy" on large maps like those does not consist of almost any gunplay what so ever, and even if there is, its a minimal. The point is, big maps are not thought out properly (if even thought out AT ALL) and most of the time do not require a whole lot of thought anyway.

Okay, my post there was flawed, I'll be back with a redraft. :P

i don't personally like big maps, but i think it's just fine if others love them =)
what's the problem? i mean, lets says you are right, lets say big maps require no strategy and it's all about driving vehicles, and whoever aims first wins, (i don't agree with this but lets say its true) , even though: what's the problem if others like it that way?

btw as garagorn said large maps can be great fun if administrated properly, they can really be full of strategy cause each team needs to defend the base and attack at the same time (ctf is perfect for huge maps).
i prefer small maps as alredy said, but sometimes i have a big fun with big maps (lol)

What I am saying is simple: Your definition of game play is not the same as others. And their definition is just as valid as yours because it is subjective. There is no word trickery here. Correct me if I am wrong but you are saying that game-play can only have one meaning. I am saying it doesn't, that it is subjective and unique to each individual.

That may not make them good for you but they are good for others who don't share your point of view.

This is your bias and is far from fact because the large maps clearly work well enough in Halo that they have been downloaded the most and are consistently in the top most played lists. You may not like them but that doesn't change the fact that others do and your opinion is no more valid that theirs.

The fact that you chose to make a map concentrating on a specific type of game play is fine and admirable but that doesn't discount those who don't want to play the game that way or wish to make a map suited for a different type of game play. Their fun is just as valid as yours it is just different.

You once said that not all opinions are created equal well if that is true then the opinions that are not equal tend to be the ones formed from narrow focused bias or from the inability to see other points of view.

In my opinion my opinion is more valuable than the opinion of a random halo player. In your opinion all opinions are valid and equal. We obviously can not both be right.



That's not what I'm saying.



Popularity and quality are two entirely different things. Smoking is popular and exploits people with addictive chemicals. World of Warcraft is popular and exploits players with addictive skinner box mechanics to keep them hooked.



See above.



You keep using this word bias like it's a bad thing, when it's not. Biases are formed over time from experiences, and are the only thing that let us form solid opinions in the first place. There's no such thing as an unbiased person, and there's no reason why anyone should strive to be unbiased either. My years of experience in making assets for halo, and other games have led me to my biases, and my ability to form thought out opinions, and explanations why certain things are bad or good, instead of just, I like this therefore it is good, and I don't like this so therefore it is bad.
Edited by SeL on Apr 20, 2011 at 03:39 PM

That's your opinion
Edited by SeL on Apr 20, 2011 at 03:49 PM

Opinions are antonyms from facts. Therefore his statement was hardly an opinion.

By what standard is gameplay considered good? What defines good gameplay for an FPS like Halo? It still sounds greatly like you deem anything contrasting to your opinion immediately flawed. Dennis is trying to explain that good gameplay has no single definition. I'm going to expand on that and simply state that gameplay is too broad of a term. There are many different styles of gameplay, like it has been implied and occasionally mentioned, but no single, generic style of gameplay all maps must abide by. For the style of gameplay your map abides by, a massive map like Coldsnap wouldn't even fit in that category. See what I am saying?