[article] Design Considerations for HLDM Part 1

This is a discussion topic for the article "Design Considerations for HLDM Part 1" by sulsa which can be found here

Article description:

Gamedesign theory for Halflife

A somewhat irrlevant article these days, but it would still be interesting to see what people think...

The tut says not to map angry, but what about writing tuts angry? There seems like a lot of yelling and generally venting going on in here, which, to the newbie audience that this is otherwise addressed, will probably not really help people out. This is like when I read the foreward in books and they talk to me as if I read the book already - of course not, it's the foreward!

Anyway, I also felt a bit of effort could have been used to not make this tut two years out of date...

A few more concrete examples of what you mean on gameplay elements in maps, like you did with crossfire, could be helpful (especially in describing the ambush points) Some pictures to break up the text text text could also help in this regard.

A good description of the basics of weapon placement though

Good tau jumpers (and the most successful ones) don't require any binds more complicated than
bind "q" "lastinv"

This comment includes part 2 and 3 in the series as well

[EDIT]
I re-read this several times, and even slept on it for a night, and IMO it is severely biased toward sloppy mapping.
any new mapper would read this and think it alright to just do anything..without any consequences at all.
i feel it either needs re-written, or removed. R_Speeds is NOT A TRAP, R_Speeds is a PRINCIPAL!

the reason it is used a a base for deciding whether a map is constructed properly is because it is so stable.
no matter your PC specs, the r_speeds will remain constant, if its 1000 on your PIII 450, it will be 1000 on your PIV 2.5..

either way, a tutorial should never lean quite so strongly, one way over another, this tut favors sloppy, and can be read no other way..
mapping should be fun, mapping should never be sloppy, you can achieve fun thru quality, why not do so..

new mappers will read this tut and get the wrong impression, and THAT is ALL IMPORTANT!

First lep, I hope you got sulsa's permission to post these here...

Anyways, these articles are most excellent. Having read them when I first started mapping, they have influenced my mapping style ever since. Sulsa is right you guys, you just cant bring yourself to admit it.

Sulsa is not saying "hey, go make something with 9999 wpoly", he is just saying that you shouldnt compromize your mapping vision to bring down the r_speeds by a small bit. You guys have to remember that when this article was origionally written the r_speeds "rule of law" was 600 tops. Now I think most people will agree that It is far better to have a map with great gameplay and 1000 wpoly occasionally instead of having a mediocre map with 500-600 wpoly.

I don't have a problem with maps that have high r_speeds. I DO have a problem with maps with high r_speeds which could be substantially lower. If the mapper has an idea and pushes the limits a bit, thats fine. If a mapper is just sloppy and has areas that could clearly have much lower wpoly with a bit of work, thats unacceptable.

1st mazeman, susla joined the same day this was posted, so maybe its his work?
2nd, i admit page 2 and 3 have some merit, but i am sorry,this page reads wrong, i don't care how you break it down..
if he quoted a reasonable number and worked down from there, at least we would have a base for acceptance, or not, but all this says is "GO FOR IT GUYS" and thats just wrong..
i have always been of the mind, map your own way, but i am also of the mind that if your own way is a poor way, at least be man enuff to accept the criticism for your choice..
page 2 and 3 were good and great respectively.. page one here, needs RE-WRITTEN or REMOVED..
/my 2 cents..

Sulsa - I agree 100% with your comment, "Make the maps YOU want to make, not what other people tell you" (paraphrased).

But I don't agree that r_speeds limits are no longer important. No matter how clever your Geforce FX graphics card (or whatever) is, we are still discussing a 5 year old game. Yes, newer technology has allowed us to increase the rough limits on r_speeds (it used to be around 600 wpolys for me, now it's around 900). But even modern hardware suffers low framerates when asked to push 2000+ wpolys.

I remember reading this back, on Sulsa's old site, when I was a newbie, and I must say, that I found it then to be a very good tutorial. Today (I just re-read it) and it may seem like it has lost some of its edge, but 2-3 years ago, everyone was talking about how to reduce R-Speed. Newbies where always posting questions about how do I reduce my R-Speeds, Problems with compiling and maps been reviewed harshly for having R-Speed greater then 50-80. It really took a lot of fun out of mapping, having all these R_Speed Nazi's around. I think in light of that, this was a extremely good tutorial, because he has put in context a lot of the basics of Mapping philosophy. Note that this is a Mapping tutorial for Newbies back in Oct 2001, it telling them it is OK to map and have fun. What more can you ask for? (that is a rhetorical question)