..... map design sighhh....

(chenapan) #1

OK i am sorry to sound like a broken record, but i dont know…

with all you echo data you cant see how much spawncamp there is on almost everysingle map ?? and also that every game look the same ? why cant you just open the maps ? like, really open. remove long corridor path, make real multiple routes, add more complexity, verticality, flanking options, even backing option, so we have real choice to make to go from point A to point B. this will also naturally kills this spawncamp fest. .if the spawn are more open, and there is actually several REAL routes then nobody will be able to hold the spawn like this.
( i emphasis this because apparently you tried to fix this pbm on chapel … by ADDING walls, seriously this is a shooter, not a maze simulator ( a maze with one path lol ))

i mean right now, my experience with the map is

[ul]
[li]alway the same scenario, or 2
[/li][li]ok i have 2 routes in front of me wich lead to the same battle front so it doesnt really matters wich way i take… zero tactical decision
[/li][li]trick jumps path wich are too obvious, artificial, and doesnt reward you (beside attenuate the frustration of being forced to use a long and convoluted path to the same point.).
[/li][li]all in all i feel like a puppet wich cant make any decision
[/li][li]not having fun
[/li][/ul]

i feel like you want to much to control how the map and game is played, and you dont realize that it kills the fun, i mean freedom is really important for human beings (even for gamers)

again sorry to talk about w:et, but the experience was really different, when you wanted to get somewhere you had more choices, and the objective mechanics allowed for more epic “in extremis” and orginal scenario

or… maybe we just dont have the same idea of the… ok, i will try a different approach :

can you explain us in detail what is you concept with the maps, why you made them like that, and what type of experience you expect us to have with it ?

PS :
while you are at it, can you explain us what is your concept with the slow objective completion ( i am talking about the slow EV, the somewhat slow construction bars, and the very slow delivery bar and spawn capturing bar )

thank you designers, in advance for any light on this subject !! :slight_smile:

(Humbugsen) #2

there are like 23435236634321 threads on this :slight_smile:
Some kind of statement from Splash Damage would be cool.

(sunshinefats) #3

I couldn’t agree more with the idea of giving the players more freedom(in general). As it is, I feel like the game stifles my creativity, which is not much fun…monotonous is the word for it maybe?
I get the impression that SD wants it to be that way though…like it’s meant to be some sort of glorified tdm CS clone.
I’ve said it before, but I find it odd that, when every other FPS is exploring new options to give MORE freedom, the guys at SD are trying to restrict us in every way they can think of…it’s just weird, and I wish, at least, I knew what their logic was behind that decision.

(-PogS-) #4

I don’t see any problems with map design on a overall basis. The routes are made to create shock points and make the game dynamic. I have the feeling that if more routes were added, then the game would be boring with more search than actual fighting. The game is objective oriented and more routes would dilute it.

(PinkFrog) #5

The way the maps are designed links into the core of the game mechanics. It’s about two small teams of players tussling over objectives. When you open up the maps, you get TDM, basically… or sniper-heaven… or other stuff.
It would be a different game.

That’s not bad per se, just, this is Dirty Bomb and that is a viable design choice.

Not that i wouldn’t like to see some tweaks to the existing maps and also give us some layouts that slightly differ, just to try it out and see how things change. But that doesn’t make the existing maps invalid in my eyes.

EDIT: uh… i think i am speaking too generally here. Never mind then… :o

(BomBaKlaK) #6

Did you play previous SD games ? TDM happen when there is not enough routes, or bad obj design, with more space and more routes you can add a real tactical depth, actually that’s just corridor based TDM maps like every Korean F2P.

But most of the maps were made before the movement system, so I really hope some real modification to fit the movement system (more tricks jumps) Dome take the right direction to me, and I really hope the best for futur maps.

Like always wait and see but for the moment I don’t see anything …

(chenapan) #7

( first, this is the kind of message / reflexion i would love to hear from the dev, to really get what they ant to achieve. )

[QUOTE=PinkFrog;529352]The way the maps are designed links into the core of the game mechanics. It’s about two small teams of players tussling over objectives. When you open up the maps, you get TDM, basically… or sniper-heaven… or other stuff.
It would be a different game.
[/QUOTE]

Well for the record i didnt spoke about large open battlefield, like in “Battlefield” ?

I agree that the game should be dynamic, and i didnt ask for a maze (with too many routes wich leads to a search game )
just to have more “options” to offer choices, and lead to a tactical gameplay, because now, there is objectives right, but for now i woulldnt call it a tactical objective team-based shooter, but rather an objective team-deathmatch ability-based or better yet a
“whomever hits harder get the objective done shooter”
I think in the end of the day i feel that raw power is way too much rewarding in the game, and actually the only way to get obj done.

I do hope so too !

thank you for the small version, and yes !

this is the all point of this thread…

:eek: STILL WAITING FOR A DEV STATEMENT ON THIS MATTER :tongue:

(Glottis-3D) #8

errrr.

maps are not bad?
maps were supposed to be like that?

omg, some pple do not have a clue.

  1. all maps except for DOme and Overground were designed for game with another movement system (before long and walljumps were introduced)
  2. all maps suffer from weird moving spawn system.
  3. all maps are or Were for very long time just curved tubes.

so we have to multiply the damage from those three.

(-PogS-) #9

Yeah I played Enemy Territory and ET:QW. not much Brink though. Db is clearly the most corridored of them and could benefit from getting closer to what was ET.

(BomBaKlaK) #10

ET was not a curved tube corridor based game … ET maps offer way more possibilities than DB maps.

(chenapan) #11

Hi there,

while waiting for a statement from the dev as asked in this thread,
here is the statement from the dev from the video “what is dirty bomb”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxXbunzkSns
i tried to transcript it, but i missed a small part in the middle if anyone can help :slight_smile:
anyway the meaning is still there and this is pretty catastrophic

host :
Great games can be ruin by poor map design
How do you go about making err good map ?

malarky:
For the map, i think the most important thing is understanding what the win/loss ratio for map is and then designing changes around that.
With heat maps, we can see where the contential kills are, we can see like if the sniper got a massive bondage on a particular map so. […]
we can put covers to reduce the effectivness of the snipers, this is little things like that.

soo,
ok this is dramatic, it seems to be a very data-oriented approach and confirm of my fears and feelings about this subject.

no mention of “fun” “entertaining” “epicness” “interesting” “tactictal” etc etc…


"how to make good map ? "
“well you need to make sure math is ok”

OMG this is beyond word… i could go on a big rant about art, creativity, fun, humanhood and such… but this is soo … lame, i mean…we are not ****ing numbers ffs… you are not supposed to manage datas !!! you are supposed to create something, to create emotions, entertainment, i … i… aaaah
please, now more than ever with the open beta coming, please somebody at SD takes the time to answer this thread and make a real bold statement about maps

(Glottis-3D) #12

i wouldnt go too far in overdramatizing this statement.
map-making is a full on creative process. you cannot literally express how to make a good map, just like you cannot tell how to make a good song. other than start with a great riff, then add catchy chorus, and top it with an existential solo.

(montheponies) #13

You can however start with the idea that map should suit the game mode…

For Objective the maps are OK’ish, but they could be a lot better. For SW I think they are poor.

As before they could do with not having a serial objective structure - simply have a primary objective, with secondary objectives opening up paths, forward spawns, objectives that didnt make you want to cry (carrying a jug to a place…chaperoning a slow moving ev, just so the map gets fully used).

But this is has all been said before and SD have said nothing about changing the maps, and at this stage with the art passes and polishing/lighting etc I dont see that as changing. Only thing to hope for is newer maps will be more orientated to SW or SD will allow fan created maps to be submitted for adding to the official map pool (SD have never shown any talent for creating competitively played SW maps, so ‘custom maps’ could be a life/game saver).

(onYn) #14

[QUOTE=chenapan;529136]
can you explain us in detail what is you concept with the maps, why you made them like that, and what type of experience you expect us to have with it ? [/QUOTE]

I really would LOVE an answer to that. As long as it´s honest I probably could play and support the game again. But the amount of ignorance and missing communication regarding this topic stopped me from playing and suggesting that game to people at all…

(BioSnark) #15

I can’t invite people to play the game with neither overground nor dome in rotation. Will be sad if the current map pool, including the bad bridge, is the selection at open beta.

There are a lot of reasons not to open beta any time soon and maps are near the top.

(BomBaKlaK) #16

The new new dome we can play in the match making is really nice !
More maps like this please !