Snarkpit Forum Index » General Banter » HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
« previous page 1
2
3
...
4 next page »
Post Reply
Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by SaintGreg on Mon Jan 3rd at 6:59am 2005

Meaning its only 75% dead . I think that the biggest problem with HL2 mapping is that its TOO similar to HL. Instead of going in a new direction that could be more productive they basically kept all the same stuff adding only small refinements. The biggest exception to that is the entity system which I agree is very pleasant. The same goes for alot of things about HL -> HL2 but thats another story.

I think mapping for HL2 is much easier and better than HL, but with improvements to the engine and hammer it could be much much better. I'd also like to see the in game visualization be like the actual game. I don't know about unreal or doom3 (never tried them) but in far cry's sandbox editor, the view is actually pretty impressive as it looks just like it would in the game (except with the names of components displayed, which probably can be turned on and off) as I believe it has a full (but modified) cryengine running inside the editor.




Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Junkyard God on Mon Jan 3rd at 11:18am 2005

hl1 is not limited, just use spirit of hl fdg and source etc. Consumed has even coded a camera for spiritofhl 1.5 release and they are working on mirrors. [addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Orpheus on Mon Jan 3rd at 11:47am 2005

? quoting SaintGreg
I think that the biggest problem with HL2 mapping is that its TOO similar to HL.

i hesitate to disagree since i have yet to even open the editor, BUT. speaking as someone who has been around for both since their inceptions, i have seen far more confusion with HL2, than there ever was with HL1.

we all are confused in the beginning, and i anticipate my own levels of confusing topics, but the solutions were more easily implemented in HL1. i have not only seen the same issues arise repeatedly, but the solutions seem to not be universally fixing them.

another point, omitting the rash influx of the nasty killbox, no one can seem to grasp the size difference. many of the new maps i see are comparable to HL1 in area displacement.

i think there is to drastic a step up between HL1 and HL2.

/ 2 cents

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by baalpeor on Mon Jan 3rd at 2:02pm 2005

? quoting Andrei
I can't understand why ppl keep whining about the new hammer! Consider yourselves lucky! Unlike me, you don't have to learn how to use a new editor when moving on to HL2 mapping. You switch from Hammer to Hammer. I had to switch from QuArK to Hammer. And they don't have much in common.

Yes indeed. In about a week or so you can also switch back, lol!

Doom3 and HL2 are coming for Quark -- yay!

Quark rules!

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by $loth on Mon Jan 3rd at 2:07pm 2005

? quote:
In my current map the majority of the detail is done with brushes



ditto, I haven't got a single model in .......yet. To me, models if used a lot, seem more like prefabs.
[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Orpheus on Mon Jan 3rd at 2:07pm 2005

? quoting baalpeor

Quark rules!

careful, quark is considered on par with "killbox"

in any case, it is used by a small minority, and hardly classifies as "rules"

cash, might beg to differ however

/runs

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Nickelplate on Mon Jan 3rd at 2:30pm 2005

? quoting SaintGreg
Meaning its only 75% dead .

Damn you're right...

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by habboi on Mon Jan 3rd at 4:34pm 2005

When i first heard HL2 was coming out i was very excited and thought of all the things i could put in a map with the new source

After watching loads of videos i was amazed and wanted to put such effects in my maps

Sure HL1 was a legend but you have got to move on with the crowd and just accept that HL2 mapping opens a dorrway to many possibilities and many great mods to come throughout the years

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by SaintGreg on Mon Jan 3rd at 6:06pm 2005

Orph, just because its more confusing in HL2 doesn't mean its still not too similar. What I'm saying is that because the framework of mapping and the engine is largely the same for HL2 as it was for HL, it doesn't get to take advantage of the newer technology that 6 long years can provide as much as something that is adapted and developed to be different, but better.

Yes, new features and new entities and new "stuff" make HL2 more complicated to map for, but its still basically the same as HL. If you know that, you shouldn't have too much trouble figuring out a solution.




Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Orpheus on Mon Jan 3rd at 6:15pm 2005

? quoting SaintGreg
Orph, just because its more confusing in HL2 doesn't mean its still not too similar. What I'm saying is that because the framework of mapping and the engine is largely the same for HL2 as it was for HL, it doesn't get to take advantage of the newer technology that 6 long years can provide as much as something that is adapted and developed to be different, but better.

Yes, new features and new entities and new "stuff" make HL2 more complicated to map for, but its still basically the same as HL. If you know that, you shouldn't have too much trouble figuring out a solution.

thats a fair assessment, i just happen to not agree. the difficulty factor isn't just a bunch of kids trying mapping for the first time. there is a rather large portion of the advanced among us also having trouble. we could attribute this to the steam shortcomings, but i don't think that enough to cause this much trouble.

the HL2 maps that are possible, are leagues above anything possible with HL1. i think you are only looking at the surface of the hammer editor and postulating your decision based off its interface.

course, i have been on the wrong side of many fences before. i could be *ahem* wrong *ahem* again.

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Andrei on Mon Jan 3rd at 6:44pm 2005

? quoting baalpeor

Doom3 and HL2 are coming for Quark -- yay!

It's good to see that their site is being updated once again.

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Nickelplate on Mon Jan 3rd at 7:38pm 2005

Anyone ever used "Qoole?" [addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by habboi on Mon Jan 3rd at 9:26pm 2005

Nope never heard of it :O

The great orph wrong :O

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by pepper on Mon Jan 3rd at 10:37pm 2005

the new hammer seems to be good, but it lags very hard on my system, how odd it is because i can run hl2 almost wiht everything on full.
[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Myrk- on Mon Jan 3rd at 11:12pm 2005

I see what you mean... For such a minute change in the engine and system of HL2 theres a lot more processing power to do it all, and Hammer runs like a crippled mule now- I mean, cumon! It's just a load of lines and some very simple 3D model rendering!

Also don't like the way HL2 mapping is so slow. I know some people say to leave HL2 open when you map, but even with my 3000XP Athlon 512Mb DDR system it runs slow in hammer, and after 30 minutes of mapping my system is out of resources! At least it seemed as though Hammer 3.5 only used a bit of Ram, but maybe its just the way you have to use steam to run anything. It's just so annoying compiling and searching through a very restrictive texture set then loading HL2.

Anyone who says HL2 texture set isn't restrictive is a fool! No offence to anyone here, but all the new HL2 maps look identical to me. It's either nature or combine, I'm prone to it too but theres not much we can do with this limited selection.

[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by RaPtoR on Mon Jan 3rd at 11:13pm 2005

uumm.. i just wanted to say that source kicks the hell out of the old half-life 1 engiene, i quit the HL1 mapping directly when i tried out Hammer 4.0 for the first time. Its completley similar to map, but you get better results.



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Yak_Fighter on Mon Jan 3rd at 11:20pm 2005

Hammer runs slow because there's a boatload of 512x512 textures with bump maps and surface properties and Hammer loads them all, plus all the model skins and all those decals. I'd think that some additional slowdown compared to HL1 is inevitable. [addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by ReNo on Mon Jan 3rd at 11:23pm 2005

Don't forget the city 17 setting Myrk There are quite a few more original or unique maps out there too though - look at dm_cascade set around a dam, dm_avalon set around some crazy rock castle place, dm_drift set in...a funky generic DM arena, or dm_rebar which takes place in a building site.

HL2's texture set lends itself far better to real world mapping than HL1's texture set did, so I guess if that is your interpretation of "restricting" then I'd have to agree.
[addsig]



Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Mouse on Mon Jan 3rd at 11:39pm 2005

Yeah, Qoole, I never used it but I remember it. Didn't Qoole become Quark?


Anyone ever tried to build maps for Duke3d in the Build editor? That was pretty annoying.




Quote
 Re: HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping
Posted by Nickelplate on Tue Jan 4th at 12:05am 2005

I think Qoole may have become quark I am not sure tho. I think the textures are restrictive. On the RTSFM (restrictive texture scale for mappers [1-10]) HL2 rates about a 7 (10 being the MOST restrictive.) AND hammer i so slow because of the 512x512 textures AND steam is running in the background, too. [addsig]




« previous page 1
2
3
...
4 next page »
Post Reply