Ok, It was a boring day in india. So I decided to try and find out just what it was that makes map look good? I came up with this, now edited down the page some...
Mj
The key to a good looking map...
Moderator: Moderators
The key to a good looking map...
Last edited by Mj on Sun Aug 01, 2004 6:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
to Mj who misunderstood my first answer:
another 'tip' to be added should be .... "use your imagination, be orginal and inventive. enough of the same lol
"
otherwise very good...
another 'tip' to be added should be .... "use your imagination, be orginal and inventive. enough of the same lol
"otherwise very good...
Last edited by m4rine on Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"We must become the change we want to see in the world" (Mahatma Gandhi)
My bad.New updated version, with help from m4rine:
The key to a good looking map is made of 6 points.
1. Height
2. Light/Shadow
3. Textures
4. Detail
5. Flow
6. Variation
I will now explain each one.
Height. No real place is flat. Look out the window. The grass is bumpy, or the row of houses
goes uphill, or the paving stones are unequal heights. This constant variation should be
reflected in the height of your terrain, or the layout of your city. Also, height of
buildings matter, as not many buildings share the exact same height, so variation is
important. Also scale is important, as the right scale, will create a better sence of reality.
Light/Shadow. The light settings are important, and also that they match the selected sky,
and atmostphere of the map. Ambientlight should always be kept low enough that shadows can
be seen fully, but light enough so that most textures can be seen. The real light source
you should use fully is suncolor, as this will create nice directional shadows, and you
can place the sun as to where the shadows will create most impact. Do not rely on
ambientlight for the rooms, and have an individual light entity, with a lamp model to make
it look more real. Variance in colour of light entities can also add a great effect.
Textures. Getting the right textures for your map is important, and can be done by roaming
around with a digital camera, or searching on the web. Getting a theme going is what the
textures do best, and should be all kept to thet theme, whilst still varying, to keep people
interested in the textures. Scaling of textures is even more important, as if a chalkboard
is the size of a house, it kind of ruins it. Also some textures do not collate, so need to
be fitted to the brush. Here again, scale is important. It is good to keep the theme flowing
and try to avoid too many real oddities, as it can destroy the image completely.
Detail. Detail is what will keep someone interested, so go and add varied things you see in
everyday life, like drains, pipes, taps, vents, anything that fits in with the theme, but be
careful not to go overboard, as it tends to overcrowd the map, and makes it feel cluttered.
Detail is also important on textures, and will help to keep people interested, and make it
seem like a more realistic environment.
Flow. It helps to be consitent in your mapping. This does not mean sacrificing variety. If your map has a certain 'flow', keep that going throughout the whole map, otherwise it may spoil the feel of a good map. Flow goes for details also, too many details can clutter the map, and it becomes unatural. Also try to keep textural oddities down to a minimum. Whilst one or two are good for creating a more authentic atmostphere, too many can ruin the flow of the theme.
Variance. This is the real keystone, and the word (or one of its variants) is infact used in
in each of the above paragraphs. Varied height, colour, texture, light, detail and angle is
what keeps people interested, and will keep the person looking. Variance is real, look out
the window. Each tree is different, the houses are different sizes, even the colour of your
wall varies as you look at it. This, you should try and reflect in your map, by varying as
much as possible. Also people want not only new maps, but fresh ideas to play with, new
scenarios and new game types. Try to be inventive - there are hundreds of maps that people
can download that may be good, but don't really offer any new concepts. There are no standards
to how a map should be played, so let your imagination run away and create something really
original and new.
How do we know this?
Take a look at your first map. No doubt you now think it rubbish, and
should do. What makes it rubbish? It probably only keeps to one of the points, in a few cases
more, but most around 1. It has out of scale stretched textures, it has a weak light entity,
or high ambintlight, which go to make it look plasticy and unreal, it has no detail, and it
has unvaried right angled corners. So if that is a bad map, it is obvious to see that a good
map is the opposite.
You may be shouting 'gameplay' but since there is no real formula for gameplay, and there are so many variables, that it is almost impossible for one to tell another how it is done. We can dispense a few tips though:
O, U and 8 shaped maps (as basic layout) are ideal for larger maps, with cover and ambush points being frequent, and try and avoid to many open spaces. You need to get the right balance - if the map is OBJ you need an equal amount of hiding places, cover and open landscape for both teams to make it fair - otherwise people will just want to go on the good team, thus destroying playability. If your map is DM, make the whole map consitent in the number of cover/hiding places, or good places for a shootout. Otherwise people will end up playing only half of your map. For SP, make sure it is a challenge but not impossible. A 'medium' difficulty level would be the best level to aim at.
Whilst you have those shouting 'gameplay', you have those screaming 'FPS'. A difficult topic if you want a real good looking map, but it
is possible to keep FPS up, by utilising Vis leafgroups, and the like, which, isn't really my area our expertise.
Mj + m4rine
Anything else we missed?
Mapping scholars now
Last edited by Mj on Sun Aug 01, 2004 6:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
eh i completely dissagree.... seems 90% of mappers are slave to ambient light, or as I like to call it 'lazy light' There is no reason why every entity and texture has to be lit, in fact, its unrealistic in any scenario that dos not involve a noonday sun. =)
Not that anyone really cares =p every post ive seen related ot a lighting question -ever- on this board has had at least one reply of 'increase ambient light'
Im not sure of numbers, but it seems to be that after pass 15/20 on the ambient scale you have compeltely disruped any natural lighting you attempted... course i could be wrong, cause I dont include ambient light beyond 5-10 in any of my compiles.
sorry! I just hate overly ambient maps, even the best maps with 30 ambient light look like a map, and not a place.
Not that anyone really cares =p every post ive seen related ot a lighting question -ever- on this board has had at least one reply of 'increase ambient light'
Im not sure of numbers, but it seems to be that after pass 15/20 on the ambient scale you have compeltely disruped any natural lighting you attempted... course i could be wrong, cause I dont include ambient light beyond 5-10 in any of my compiles.
sorry! I just hate overly ambient maps, even the best maps with 30 ambient light look like a map, and not a place.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall~
eh dont mind me, but I get annoyed at so many posts reading 'increase ambient light to 35 35 35'
heh
Ambientlight is great for daylight maps in exposed areas, such as decaying or open style buildings! Its simply easier to create an overiding presence of light usign ambient in that case, tho of course it still is not as accurate a lighting depiction. Ambient light is map wide, meaning your basements, your tunnels, everything gets the modification.
Take omaha for example, its a great map, but the lighting is compeltely uniform. Inside, outside, on the beach and in the shade. This is how ea designed all of thier maps (pre spearhead - of course in spearhead they did other wierd ass things that runis alot of the good lighting).
too me... lighting is a huge deal in a map, and the only map thats easy to light is a predominantly outdoor map, with little to no subterranean areas. Sunlight will create some pretty decent shadows, and keeping the ambient light to a low value, while using supplemental lighting gives at least some character to the light present in different parts of the map. For other maps, each room will have its own lighting scheme in real life, and at least some effort to accomplish this is a great touch in a map... even if its only that bigger rooms look different then smaller rooms due to lighting, that alone is a lighting signature for that room, helping ot make it more distnct and more unique/memorable.
to the credit of the list in this post, It does say that shadows should not be eliminated, but I just dont think that being able to fulyl see textures in shadowed area is a GOOD tip in every scenario. For instance... many nighttime, or deep underground scenarios are probably best characterized by shadows, and the existence of true light and dark. Hazing it over with ambient so that everyone cna clearly be seen has to be to the detriment of the map in that case no?
heh
Ambientlight is great for daylight maps in exposed areas, such as decaying or open style buildings! Its simply easier to create an overiding presence of light usign ambient in that case, tho of course it still is not as accurate a lighting depiction. Ambient light is map wide, meaning your basements, your tunnels, everything gets the modification.
Take omaha for example, its a great map, but the lighting is compeltely uniform. Inside, outside, on the beach and in the shade. This is how ea designed all of thier maps (pre spearhead - of course in spearhead they did other wierd ass things that runis alot of the good lighting).
too me... lighting is a huge deal in a map, and the only map thats easy to light is a predominantly outdoor map, with little to no subterranean areas. Sunlight will create some pretty decent shadows, and keeping the ambient light to a low value, while using supplemental lighting gives at least some character to the light present in different parts of the map. For other maps, each room will have its own lighting scheme in real life, and at least some effort to accomplish this is a great touch in a map... even if its only that bigger rooms look different then smaller rooms due to lighting, that alone is a lighting signature for that room, helping ot make it more distnct and more unique/memorable.
to the credit of the list in this post, It does say that shadows should not be eliminated, but I just dont think that being able to fulyl see textures in shadowed area is a GOOD tip in every scenario. For instance... many nighttime, or deep underground scenarios are probably best characterized by shadows, and the existence of true light and dark. Hazing it over with ambient so that everyone cna clearly be seen has to be to the detriment of the map in that case no?
When I am king, you will be first against the wall~