Crono, you come in late again (through no fault of your own) and think you have the problem summarized as soon as you posted.

Dammit man, don't you ever learn.

Anyway, I may have failed to make my point as clearly as I wished, but with the portion Mr. Smith added, I think its as close to what I originally intended to say without rehashing it all over again.

Personally, I think you totally missed Mr. Smiths addition to the situation and automatically assumed.

Morph. I hear you and agree with your point. I can and do see it clearly. I fear that even though Smith helped me, you still cannot grasp my intent.

Lets just agree to disagree since only one of us seems able to see both ways.

Crono, have I mentioned that my name is available for use for your first born?

Yeah, I think Jon is many times more preferable to Adam. " SRC="images/smiles/icon_wink.gif">

Thank you. I'm glad you can.

As for me being unable to see both ways, you didn't give me a chance to reply to Agent Smith before you took the highroad. At least give me a chance to say I see your point before you claim to be able to see mine and then quickly declare you're the only one in the debate reasonable enough to see both sides. I see now where you're coming from (if in fact Agent Smith articulated what you were trying to say all along).

for everyone...! wewt!

well done gents!!

Doc B...

I have pondered this for over an hour now and I think I have finally come up with a way, to express my viewpoint on the subject in debate.

Now, discounting any attempt to prove myself right and anyone else wrong, cause thats not my goal. My only goal is to show how I came to believe HL1 is more difficult to succeed at than HL2. Not harder to map, harder to map successfully.

Of the maps I have made, released and unreleased, I can only count 2 possible successful maps, and more than likely, only one truly great map. I am many times harder on myself than anyone else is, and I am also much harder on others maps than the majority here. I am not trying to vie for the "Most intolerable" award. I am just picky.

Another strong indicator of "how" I became convinced is the fact that I have been a part of almost every single successful map ever released at Snarkpit. That could only mean that I am an insufferable boor who insinuates his presence in all of them, or it could mean that I am available for use. Since approximately 90% of all those maps were made with me a part of them, and that they asked me to assist should say that at some level, my comments were welcome and sought after.

Of the successful HL2 maps, I have been less useful because a portion of that time I was either unavailable, or on 56k and its so hard to do anything useful for anyone. I literally have to dedicate hours for any map.

Just the very idea of connecting to the web on 56k and using steam is a hazard unto itself.

Now, since Morph and I seem to be the most vocal members talking about this I'll only use us as examples. This will sorely limit my ability to show my views but I hope he doesn't mind my trying.

Lets assume that Morph releases an exceptional map right off the bat. This could very well mean that he is an exceptional mapper. This has happened enough to make it a possibility. It could also mean that making a successful map for HL2 is more likely because it contains elements that when used correctly almost guarantees a good looking map. It doesn't really mean it is a well made map because it has premade items, but it eliminates the necessity to worry about them so you can concentrate on other things in the map.

It could be said that arrogance is blind. That attempting to compare my maps to other examples of successfully made maps is, shall I say it? "WRONG"

I have no real way to convey myself because I cannot really use anyone as an example who isn't part of the discussion.

Yeah, I could use Duncan. He has made several good looking maps, but he took a while to get that way too so... Did it take a while because HL1 is hard to map for and do it well?

Anyway, perhaps this is all bulls**t. Perhaps it clarifies my position. Perhaps I should shut up but... Thats highly unlikely to happen any time soon.

Perhaps, you'll believe me when I say Mapping for half life 1 has a much smaller window of success than HL2 has and you will just believe.

/rambling

Its very un-nerving for a discussion to deflate so rapidly Morph. If its worth arguing about, don't abruptly stop. It leads me to believe that you were only arguing because you have the ability to do so, not because you genuinely believed your viewpoint was indeed worthy of debating.

Arguments hardly ever just happen. They are stoked and nurtured into life. It takes time to argue, it should also take time to cool down.

If you want my respect, do not ever concede. If you could care less about the respect, remember that others are reading this quietly. and.. they remember.

/2 cents.

I wonder if its possible to bookmark pages. " SRC="images/smiles/heee.gif">

Sadly, in all the years I have been here, I'd now have only 3. (<---humor tag)

? quoting Addicted to Morphine

You make a good point about HL2 coming with a lot of great looking prepackaged assets. Compared to what HL1 came with (just textures) HL2 is leaps and bounds ahead.

It was something I hadn't really given much thought, but its a very valid point.

The only thing is that the props and assets you're talking about, not the mention the textures, are all so proprietary to the single-player game that getting a good map done in anything other than the motif of the original game is very hard.

Also, you're right, Morph. I have some youngsters in my class who can't stand Quake3 because "the graphics are grainy and its old." so, yeah, younger ppl don't appreciate the good old games...

Being easily influenced and being seen as a malleable person is not something I strive for. At the same time I like to keep my mind open enough to be able to integrate new information and viewpoints and then use them to reasses my own beliefs. It's a fine line between showing backbone / being steady and being close-minded / stubborn, just as there is a fine line between being weak willed and being open-minded. It's hard balance to find, and I'm still learning about life but I'd like to think I'm more open-minded than weak willed. That's not to say I don't have strong unwavering convinctions, I do, but the topic of our last debate wasn't one of them.

All true. And not so.

Old days. It took hours/days/weeks to make basic terrain. Now you have displacements. Its easier now. Harder because you now have to make them prettier but easier because the computer generally makes them for you with a simple click here and there. Old days it was not as easy. you had to clip/vertex/clip/vertex and hope you landed on all the grids and it compile successfully.

Now thats a decent description of "Difficulty"

The window of success for that terrain is smaller because, you may fail to get the rocks to compile, and once you do, they turn out so poorly that no one likes the map as well as they could have. Rocks with displacements most likely, will turn out correct enough, that people will only give them a cursory glance. Rocks, even bad ones look so much better in HL2.

Items... a decent window is a model away now. It could have been a model in HL1 but the epolie limits would eventually come into play with to many. HL2 has a much higher tolerance for models. THE WINDOW OF SUCCESS IS BIGGER!

So, the basic similarities in the games of HL1 and HL2 are design. A poorly designed map will suck with each. So using design as an example of difficulty and success isn't really an option because you can conceivably make an HL1 map and an HL2 map identically the same using brushes.

If you had an identical map with each, then they would be... IDENTICAL.

does that help?