[MajkiFajki]

I have a feeling that somehow league playing affected us. I mean maps sizes (3000x3000 units is perfect) and weapon flow (preferably maps that are lr300/m4 ONLY - that mean very short lines of sight).

I personally hate that kind of maps as a mapper-wannabe and a player - it's so boring.

[C.M.M.cec.]

Haha, this is exactly the reason why I released Aztec and not a map I made on my own.
I had a few very promising ideas in my mind with which I wanted to make at least 2 or 3 good looking and good playable maps. But as I looked at the maps being played by the community and the amount of 24/7 servers I gave up the dream of making a totally new map that no one will play eventually. This is probably what most of the map makers think and the reason why there are so few new maps out there. It is not because of the bad quality of new maps. This comes by itself, by the time a mapper is working on a map, by the amount of people playing the map and by the feedback the community gives the map maker.
If the community is not willing to play maps that are not absolutely perfectly balanced, awesome looking or if they don't want to get to know new maps, how should a new mapper get better? Same goes for the admins who don't try to run other maps than the usual ones.
Well, I personally will finish the maps I'm currently working on, Aztek and CargoShip, and give up mapping after releasing them. Maybe I'll change my mind if people play these maps. Maybe the situation changes once HD is released but to be honest, I don't want to wait years to see that nothing has changed in the end.

[CMM|theRipper]

i made a shitty low quality map ut4_tetris_b

and its played daily on several servers.
mainly because i got b00bs clan to put it on their sr8 server permanent mapcycle.


as dag said, get it on a server. if all you do is post a forum topic about your map, hardly anything will happen

This post has been edited by theRipper: 15 January 2012 - 03:26 PM

[MajkiFajki]

Quote

as dag said, get it on a server. releasing it to the forums only does hardly anything

I think that forcing players to play "shitty low quality" maps won't bring good results.

[CMM|xandaxs]

What we need --> A good server that runs a small mapcycle of maximum 8/10 3rd party maps with good quality.
This in order to advertise the maps.

We'd also need to advertise the server and ourselves play on it.

[|it|Nexu]

cec., on 15 January 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

If the community is not willing to play maps that are not absolutely perfectly balanced, awesome looking or if they don't want to get to know new maps, how should a new mapper get better?

Research before development: layout, flow, balance details, visibility.

Take a more pro-active approach into 'researching' among your target audience (public- and/or competitive players) what they would like to see and how that's going to translate into a new playable map that they, and others, would actually like to play on.

It's rare that a map developed without active feedback from audience outside the mapping community is received well and become popular (1 out of 200?). Unless the mapper himself has a good insight on that target audience and/or because he's part of it.
Going all creative on the game-play with complicated layout doesn't help players to get familiar with the map quickly and find their orientation.

Being more pro-active into getting a representative group of testers (ones that can be critical but yet constructive!) from your target audience can help to test the 'product' during development stages.
If you want your map to succeed within the competitive scene. Try to get the organisations (and players from all spectrum obviously) in that same community involved. They could potentially help to collect testers for you that can provide feedback for you; or reporting bugs that would potentially disqualified the map from competitions due to that.

Promoting your map by simply posting it on a forum (CMM or this forum) just isn't sufficient to get your 'product' out there; not everyone in the UrT community visit this forum, let alone look in the mapping sections.
The testers group therefor can also act a proxy to get the word out there for your map, "Have you seen ut4_newmap? It's a pretty very nice map. We should play that.".

Don't try to force your map onto people by spamming everyone (like on IRC). People tend not to take spammers seriously.

Running a custom map that only exist on a few game servers (due to affiliation) is only limited solution to fix it on a local scale. Getting the community in wider scale involved is what i see as a better solution to tackle the problem.
And if i were to be a map maker, i would prefer to see my maps running on various servers than simply on a few select ones that has dedicated themselves to run custom maps.
But i do agree that having maps in some server map rotation is a way to get it out there. But you'll risk that the people not caring for custom maps simply never visit those servers.

----

Personally i would like to play more custom maps, especially in competitive context (scrims/pcw, officials). For example, I love to play Tohunga(CTF) and Orbital(TS) as custom map.
But my opinion on lots of the custom maps is that a lots of them simply either doesn't have the game-play quality and balance. Or even if they are out there, they aren't promoted in a way for me to take notice of them.
Sure, some of the custom maps looks great. But looking great isn't the virtue of UrbanTerror of why I (and all of us?) play this game. It's the game-play which draws me back to this game over and over. But if it does looks great, that'll be a nice bonus for both players and media creators (e.g.: movie makers).

[spazzattack]

I think there is a natural slight resistance to new maps. This isn't a criticism of players or server admins, it's just that people take a bit of convincing. This is probably as well and means that some maps take a while to get going.

Let's face it, there a tonne of URT maps out there, and actually if one strips away the veneer of the graphics, many are very similar, particularly the very popular ones. Corridors, staircases, courtyards, cover. So to differentiate, the mapper has to either do something pretty, or different (or possibly both).

For mappers there are all kinds of players and servers out there, and I personally enjoy making maps that I'm interested in. To that extent it's like writing a book. You have to do something you believe in: If someone chooses to play them all the better, but I don't believe in trying to replicate what I think people want - otherwise, looking down my xfire server list ATM, I'd produce versions of Dressing Room.

Feedback is very useful, but I'm not sure design by committee always results in the best stuff.

This post has been edited by spazzattack: 15 January 2012 - 07:14 PM

[CMM|xandaxs]

nexu, Competition players don't tend to help out mappers by testing their maps :/

[|<3|mogul]

There's much to say about this topic Maj, but to get right to the point:

MajkiFajki, on 13 January 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

tons of documentation

The main reason for the lack of mappers and in-depth maps is probably due to the overwhelming amount of information- or lack thereof in some cases.

Put simply,there doesn't seem to be any one source that is the go-to place for mappers.As Delirium mentioned,this could ideally be through a main source,such as Frozen Sand,or MTC/CMM; maybe even all three if the language barriers could be worked around.

I propose gathering the collective knowledge of the mapping community into one place,into a guide.
This guide would be up to date as reasonably possible,stopping up to 4.1,maybe 4.1.1 (haven't tested the latter so I'm not sure how much it differs from the 4.x versions).

It would at least (and most importantly) cover the basics.

Possible Topics

• What Software to get,and the recommended versions
  
• The scripts used
  
• The syntax/terms used (Radiant shortcut basics,3DS Max modelling etc.)
  
• An entire section devoted to Shaders(surfaceparms,culls,proper alpha-channel usage)
  
• Mapping DOs. (power of 2 resolution textures,proper caulking,proper usage of cull back etc)
  
• Mapping DON'Ts (leaks,polycount management,excessive lighting)
  
• Map layout and metagame

After someone read through said guide,he/she should (in theory) be able to design a working,playable map with in-depth gameplay and at least 70-80 FPS.

Spazz raises very interesting points about layout-familiarity and motivation.Maybe one could design a section or 2 of your map to feel familiar to a popular map (Turnpike,Casa,Sanc.,Abbey etc.).Not visually,but in the layout instead.

I think we've been spoiled when it comes to familiar maps.Stepping out of our comfort zone once in a while might not be so bad.It's a shame most of the casual players never even set foot on the forums,let alone the mapping section

[FS BladeKiller]

Part of the problem seems to be that some mappers don't want to make the types of maps that are popular and then sneer at those maps. When we first saw Turnpike we didn't think people would like it. Surprise! Dressing Room was made so you could try on fun stuff but people liked playing it and asked for the different gametypes. It seems that our community likes smaller maps most of the time. It's that fast and furious gameplay that attracts people. Most people don't enjoy wondering around endless corridors looking for someone to fight. Perhaps the best way to develop a reputation as a mapper who makes maps worth playing is to start with small ones that are fun. Then when you have a reputation for making great maps make a bigger one. If people know this mapper makes great maps they are going to be more willing to try the bigger map.