.Map :: MoHAA Mapping

I've been seeing a few posts about FPS and things to do with final compiles. When I compile a map to check it I use SDK to do it and then just 'play' it in Spearhead.

I guess my question is: Should I be checking my maps some other way?

Aside from checking your map's performance, you should give it to someone to playtest it (maybe a small LAN session?!) and to see problems, you don't see anymore after having built it for so long.
Let everybody write a list of what he found which you can then process.
Then, give it to us as a beta version and we might tell you what could be made different (or even better).
Always tell people that it is a Spearhead map because many won't be able or want to play it then and d/l ing a map for nothing is rather irritating.

Map performance! How do I check that? (Or did you mean, just see how it plays?)

I'll certainly get some people to test my map when I finish it. I'm finally making my first map, after fiddling with things in a testmap that I plonk just about any idea i have.

Thanks Wacko

performance: check fps and how much is drawn of hidden brushes
with console commands r_showtris 2 and fps 1 and also you could look at the portals with r_showportals 1. you'll have to start your map with cheats enabled for these commands (fps is allowed)

Ooo, sneaky console commands, i like it Thanks

Is there a list of console commands with explanations somewhere?

Thanks 8)

OK, this FPS thing:

What sort of numbers are we talking about? What is a bad fps and what is a good fps? My map is showing around 40 - 80 at this stage of construction.

It really depends on what the spec of the computer you are using are.
If you have the latest Monster PC and get 40 - 60 fps, then people with low spec machines will probably be lucky to get 20 fps

Ah, my PC is an Intel P4 1.7 GHz 256MB RAM with a poo GeForce2 MX 400 64MB graphics card.

don't forget the video settings in MOHAA! A setting with maximal details, effects etc. with highest resolution possible has worse FPS and MTex as a minimal configuration, of course! And you won't have to make a map that can be played with settings high on a Pentium II! Ppl with high-end PCs have spent lots of money and they deserve to get s/th for it. So make a map they will love and the average will like

Nobody said PC-gaming is cheap or even for free! Sorry, but playing a game needs always an adequate machine!

web designers will aggree: who's still taking care of ppl with 14" monitors running in 640x480? No one! 800x600? Maybe, sometimes... But you can read it on almost every site: "Optimized for 1024x768" and this means a 17" monitor...

But then: How much FPS is good? How much makes playing enjoyable and fair?

Good points Wacko, I need to make a map that will be available to most PC users, but also be detailed enough to be interesting. I hear trees don't do a map any favours on speed nor do white objects.

Thanks for the input m8

i know about trees (though i have dozens in my map ) but white objects? could u explain this?

I've heard it takes a lot more graphics card power to create the colour white! So a level with snow in it will run more slowly than if it had grass instead.

Could be a load of rubbish though!

Zip wrote:Could be a load of rubbish though!

I'd say so, but who's me to dare to?!