SnarkPit's New Focus

First, read the LATEST UPDATES thread before commenting please.

I understand there might be some controversy over SnarkPit NOT assuming the same role in the gaming community as it has in the past. I am of the opinion that SnarkPit could and should pursue other areas of game design. Even if we don't currently have experts or professionals here to fill the boards with content.

My reason is: If we're gonna build this rich online toolset for amateur developers to use to make their levels with, why stop it with just level design? We could easily duplicate that interface to reach a broader audience.

Disciplines of game design I think SnarkPit could tackle in addition to level design:

• World Design (backstory, setting & theme)
• System design (game rules and math patterns)
• Content design (characters, items, puzzles & missions)
• Game Writing (dialogue, text & story)
• Level design (construction of worlds and its features)
• User Interface design (user interaction and feedback interface [menus, heads-up displays])
• Audio design (sound effects, voice acting)

Imagine a drop-down list that organizes the site into a whole different category related to that discipline. Then you can select your game/developer/engine and start looking for related content.

Ultimately, I think the site could be built around the different free editors out there. Start with 3D engines and expand with the user base.

A possible 'proposal' button could submit requests for a new discipline to open up on an already listed engine. It's already design, it simply activates.

I'm getting ahead of myself... Just like SnarkPit's longevity is limited by the number of games or engines it's centered around, so too, could be the disciplines.

Examples of sites which already did these things, but focused on one or two items:

• World of Level Design
• Unity Community
• Mod DB
• Game Maker Community
• Gameful

I don't think we need to do all the things these sites do, but they do exemplify a lot of the organization I think we should consider. Just look through their categories and subcategories...

Anyhow, That's my opinion...

Who disagrees?

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

Before I vote, I want clarification of each category.
It has been my experience that definitions vary from person to person.
I want a website that curtales to all first person games and their corresponding level design.
That includes all maps and models and meshes... (or whatever the term is for each game)
On a side note, I will not trade one tyrant for another tyrant. SnarkPit began as a democracy and ended up a dictatorship. If we end up with another site where the people in leadership start dictating how posts will go instead of guiding a posts progress, I will oppose them and/or run for leadership myself to guarantee a fair attitude.
Keep this in mind while making all future plans.
(I am not accusing anyone of anything. I am making my position PERFECTLY clear and that I will not stand idly by and see dictates given)

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

Orpheus said:
I want clarification of each category.

Ok,

"None; it should remain about level design with Valve titles only and/or with other titles too."

SnarkPit, should continue to regard the entirety of the site solely on the practice of level design. There may not be such a restriction on the games and engines we regard, but depending on what engines (even 2D ones possibly), each engine would share a separate, yet similar set of tools and site layout.

"All; it should encompass all major disciplines of game design."

This is the opposite notion, where along side with level design, we also have sections of the site dedicated to Writing, or Interface Design. Basically, forums, tools, content downloads, articles, links to external resources all reference Interface Design. Switching between level design category and interface design category would restructure the site to start displaying that content. Likewise, our database of games, engines, and developers, all are visible under each category. You could cross-reference in searches the particular game/developer/engine you're looking for. We would have popular categories for popular games 'trend' on the front page, so we know what SnarkPit's current focus is.

SnarkPit wouldn't have to start by having all these sections available. Maybe it would start with just level design, but if people start posting content for another category, that category could be enabled for that particular engine/game.

"Level design and a few other related disciplines."

Perhaps, like the previous poll option, we limit SnarkPit to just focusing on content for level design, and 3D modeling. And that's as far as we go. It would be closer to Option 1, but we throw in another discipline or two, that are constantly displayed from the get-go and that would let SnarkPit expand a little from what we currently do.

"Why stop with game design? Let's become a full social hub and editing community."

This is where SnarkPit becomes something closer to Mod DB + Facebook. People get to friend one another on projects and interests, and we track usage and attempt to bring people together through recommendations and personal design layout options. We could focus on whatever aspects of game editing (or perhaps just gaming in general), but leave it more of a discussion, forum-centered and article site. People could post content and still get reviewed, but there wouldn't be many discipline-specific tools to help them organize and get noticed.

Orpheus said:
On a side note, I will not trade one tyrant for another tyrant... ...where the people in leadership start dictating how posts will go instead of guiding a posts progress...

I'm guessing my last comment saying "who disagrees?" and the chainsaw smiley made it appear too much that I'm looking for a fight. Is that what you meant by trading a tyrant for another (the former being a past owner of the Pit)? Well I hope it came across as sarcastic. I'll give it a sarcastic color font... Of course I intend to hear everyone out. I can't make all these decisions. I made this post so that we could begin. I figured with that context, my comment would not have come across as 'ass hole-ish'. I am in a leadership position, but I only use that to get the conversation started, not direct it. I feel I'm very aware of your concern and will continue to avoid a dictatorship role.

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

I think SnarkPit should do all the things we did except for all multiplayer first person games.
We are/did do plenty for gaming with a single game. We should apply EVERYTHING we did to others.
We already had modelers, coders, designers, critquers and cobitzers. We might run into a small issue with the name being still centralized in HL but since the reputation established was founded upon the name I see no way to avoid it.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

In spite of the negativity, I still feel that we need to consider broadening our horizons. ( I am seriously hoping that the negativity is a short term issue..)

That said, I also think we are in trouble...
Check out this list

We might have to be a bit.... Conservative in our choices.

[EDIT]
I am not exactly sure but I fixed a link on the Wiki Hammer editor page to link Snarkpit back here.

If I did it wrong, someone let me know. Thanx

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

sighs We are in BIG trouble.

Even if we go back only a couple years (for modernity) and not all games have editors, we are still looking at hard choices.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

Orpheus said:
That said, I also think we are in trouble...

Yea, so about all of that.... Technically, you're right; there are way too many engines, and independent tools for games out there with their own dedicated resources, to make mining some third-party site for resources worth their time.

I wouldn't suspect a site with an active user base of 8,000 (supposing all of our users that ever were, actually became super-active on the site again). I think a site that was capable of expanding with the interests of its users would be better suited to something of a smaller list than the one I see you linked.

Start with games and 'editors' (for lack of a better encompassing word) that are indeed popular, but perhaps not with the best organized documentation or reference. It's better to create the introductory info, and link and organize the relevant tutorials than to go off creating articles for the obscure and fringe techniques and features. Give your new users the tools, and they will help develop the others...

So essentially, I propose to focus on perhaps five popular editors. I don't have those picked yet. But going by editor rather than by game, would help collect similar titles and genres.

Orpheus said:
Even if we go back only a couple years (for modernity) and not all games have editors, we are still looking at hard choices.

Good point... Maybe we shouldn't even list articles under their 'editor'/tools and then by game, but instead as: By editor/tool, and then by 'features'. And then that feature could be listed in the "as seen in" with a list of known games that use that feature. Or at least in the one it describes. Keep out a lot of the accidental players Googling for insider info about their favorite game.

...Also, thanks for fixing the Wiki link. Seems to work for me.

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

Riven said:
So essentially, I propose to focus on perhaps five popular editors. I don't have those picked yet. But going by editor rather than by game, would help collect similar titles and genres.

I have been trying to come up with a workable solution.
The only one that makes any sense is by game engines, not editors.
Such as:
Quake had more than one.
HL had more than one.
It can be argued that certain ones had ONLY one like UnrealEd, but even that editor has more than one version. I haven't checked yet but I am pretty sure that Unreal one and the new Unreal cannot be made on the same editor. Even if that is wrong, WorldCraft 2.0 and Hammer 4.1 are leagues apart.

I think if we go by engine then any future game that uses the same engine BUT developed its own editor will automatically be included on our site.
If we go by editor alone instead of the engine, we will only restrict ourselves again to a limited number of possible members/years of service.

I would love to see us doing Stalkers Editor, but practicality says no. The game is a dead end, even though the engine produces some fantastic views.

The G.E.C.K. seems more practical. I don't think the Fallout games are going anyplace, anytime soon.

Crytek isn't going anyplace either.

Halo seems to be hanging in there too.

Lest we not forget, any id games.

I seriously dunno what to do. It seemed pretty clear cut at first and now... Is very intimidating.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

It can also be argued that Fallout isn't a first person shooter game too but has a fairly popular editor and an engine that can see for miles.

What if, (heaven forbid) we consider console editors? There are a bunch of those too?

I personally would hate to see it, but there are enough to consider looking into.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

Another thing to consider. Every new site (or in our case, the image of a new site) always draws lookie loos and people who simply want to begin on the ground floor. If we play our cards right we will get an influx for that alone. If we pick the correct theme we can count on keeping them as well. Our morals and system of tough but fair has proven us well. Now all we have to does pick the proper direction to apply it.
People or at least the people we need on this site, want and desire what we offer. Let's find a way to give it to them again.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

You may have mentioned this, I simply cannot recall but it is worthy of mention:
Should we stick to Steam based editors/games?

There are four of note (and prolly more but I am not sure)
[*]RAGE tool kit.
[*]G.E.C.K.
[*]UnrealEd
[*]Hammer
[*]

Not to mention, how far we should stray off the beaten path.
I mean, there is way more involved than simply placing a few solids.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

Orpheus said:
Should we stick to Steam based editors/games?

I actually really like that idea. It may be limiting, but Steam has driven a lot of activity for game mods, simply by making those editors accessible (and somewhat standardized). By keeping them up-to-date, and easy to find and activate.

Good point about sticking by engine over editor, or at least categorizing them by such. But keeping by editor IMO, would match the Steam listings. That way newbies would learn very quickly what editors are available for their games on Steam. and furthermore, we could sell ourselves as Steam's Games' editors support site!

So, I argue to do it by editor simply because that will be the recognizable listing across the internet. People don't typically look for an engine to download, they look for a game or an editor, and/or maybe some kind of renderer. You need to have one of those, otherwise you can't do much with just an 'engine' unless you're already a programmer.

On another note:
From what you've said earlier about keeping out players and killbox newbs (not your words, but is that the gist?), is fine. I generally agree, but I will say I'm probably not as strict on it as you might be. I'd like to attract the curiosity of anyone looking or interested in editing. A great deal of the site's resources should go to bringing in and guiding someone new to all of it as seamlessly as possible.

Essentially decreasing the possibility that all they decide to create is a killbox. Or to get their first maps under scrutiny. I know that flies against what we typically argued is a waste of resources and time for everyone, but imagine the excitement a newb would have to release or at least have looked at, their first creation. SnarkPit should be able to capture that excitement, even if/when their map is a piece of crap. That doesn't mean the map needs to make it into 'circulation', but that player needs to get recognized and responded to encourage them to stick with it. Yes we strive for higher quality, but also to encourage hard work, not ignore aspirations. I want a system (beyond simple forums) that makes it easy for people to leave feedback. (integrate quick feedback comments into Twitter?)

/aside.

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

I used the killbox example simply because it was something we all could relate to, but even the newest mapper is leagues ahead of a player IMO.
(plus keep in mind that we have had some VERY capable people here who never released a map so baring people on the basis of not being a mapper is not my goal.)

I know people do not download engines bud. I used that example because some engines have multiple editors.

Halflife one had what? 4?

Worldcraft, hammer, QuArk and Radiant?

The reason I said Engine, was for US to use a a guide to pick from, not as a user tool.
If we had forums like
Xray Engine
Source Engine
So on and so forth Engine,
then the editors would fall into them as they are developed over the years that they individual engines create.

Sadly, I know what I want to describe, but I am not doing it so well.

If this still doesn't make sense, I can call you later about it.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

BTW, I went ahead and got the satelite ISP. 6 years with no net is enough for anyone.
It sucks ass, but at least I can upload/download now.

I won't ever be using it to frag though..

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

You know, I'm not of the technical mind that you guys are. I'm kind of a see and do type guy. I remember my early days of mapping, and the most effective tools I found, when I finally did decide to try it were the most simple of tutorials. I believe the first one I ever looked at was something like, "Building a box and lighting it". That took me two hours or so to accomplish, and then I was hooked. The rest of my mapping skills came from tutorials listed by their editing tool names alphabetically on a website who's name escapes me at the moment.

My point is that all the coding and restructuring you speak of is all well and good for you braniacs out there, and will probably have a positive effect on the outcome you seek. In order for the pit to become "Relevant" to more people, I believe simple accessibility is key. Keep all these conversations about coding and structure in back room discussions between elders, and use those discussions to foster a simpler, user friendly, MODERN version of what the pit could be to many, as opposed to the few. Remember, most people barely scrape the surface of what a gaming engine is capable of, hence the "Killbox" epidemic. You might even try a tiered system of forum categories. Basic, intermediate, and advanced. No matter how many months I spent on my maps, I was always humbled by seemingly simple(to them) offerings of other mappers. I also reveled in reviewing those maps when I had my website The Hot Death Diner. There is still a wealth of talent out there, and they should be here with us, one of the few last bastions of true HL fans.

I also agree that a map review section would be helpful. Maybe a re-offering of some fantastically awesome maps of days gone by would re-introduce folks to what the source engine is capable of, and perhaps inspire a new generation of mappers, when offered in tandem with some basic tutorials. Just my two cents for the moment.

Juim said:
You might even try a tiered system of forum categories. Basic, intermediate, and advanced. No matter how many months I spent on my maps,

I like this, alot.

Juim said:
I was always humbled by seemingly simple(to them) offerings of other mappers.

/blushes
Thanx

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

For anyone who wants to constructively discuss the proposed subtitles, new ones, new name ideas, direction, etc, please feel free to continue the discussion here.

---

Join the professional pass4sure ccna web designing course to become expert web developer. Download 1Y0-A05 tutorials and 350-018 design guides to learn how to design effective web layouts. For more detail visit our PMI and wikipedia

If we are also talking about a new Site design, then I think this site offers some interesting features.

http://blogs.halowaypoint.com/Headlines/post/2013/02/27/The-Halo-Bulletin-22713.aspx

The drop down menus on the nav bar could really help implement your many ideas listed in the first post.

I think you should also invest some time in social media, have a facebook presences, also have a tweet feed.

Had an idea for a new logo.

[URL=http://s26.photobucket.com/user/MuhnayShot/media/Logos/snarkpitlogo_zps165f75f6.png.html][IMG]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c149/MuhnayShot/Logos/snarkpitlogo_zps165f75f6.png[/IMG][/URL]

[URL=http://s26.photobucket.com/user/MuhnayShot/media/snarkpitlogo2_zps575df981.png.html][IMG]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c149/MuhnayShot/snarkpitlogo2_zps575df981.png[/IMG][/URL]

Here is an update to the logo. Would love to hear your thoughts...

[URL=http://s26.photobucket.com/user/MuhnayShot/media/snarkpitlogo3_zps3c617c7d.png.html][IMG]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c149/MuhnayShot/snarkpitlogo3_zps3c617c7d.png[/IMG][/URL]

[URL=http://s26.photobucket.com/user/MuhnayShot/media/Snark_w_hd_zps3d210791.jpg.html][IMG]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c149/MuhnayShot/Snark_w_hd_zps3d210791.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

Hey G4MER! Glad to have your input. Plenty of things to talk about here.

I kinda like the abstract outline of the snark for an icon. I don't know if I want a vector graphic for a logo, but everywhere we could include an icon of some sort representing the Snarkpit, I think what you have here is a good start. The colors are close, but need to mesh together a little better. Maybe more of a posterized look. The look of the font definitely makes it look fairly Art Deco; classic, but maybe not the style for the Snarkpit in my opinion.

I will need to check the link out when I get more time. Thanks for joining in!

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

Give me more feedback on the font you think it needs, and I can work on something. I will try some other similar icon ideas and post them for you. Thanks for the feedback.. I am excited on the changes, and am around should you need my help.

My wife is somewhat of a professional Web Programmer now, she has been working as the lead designer for a local TV station. So if you need her assistance she said she can spare some time to help get the new pit rolling... she far exceeds my abilities now.

This is KCOS TV - http://www.kcostv.org/ The entire page was written by her from the ground up.

[URL=http://s26.photobucket.com/user/MuhnayShot/media/snarkpitlogo2_a_zps554274c2.png.html][IMG]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c149/MuhnayShot/snarkpitlogo2_a_zps554274c2.png[/IMG][/URL]

[URL=http://s26.photobucket.com/user/MuhnayShot/media/snarkpitlogo2_abstract_zpsa0f84202.png.html][IMG]http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c149/MuhnayShot/snarkpitlogo2_abstract_zpsa0f84202.png[/IMG][/URL]

I agree with generally expanding the horizons of the site...the HL2 mapping scene isn't what it used to be in it's glory days of the mid 2000s anymore...as said, this site definitely needs another source to sustain it. As to what that could be...well...you guys have a better idea than what I do. Nice logos by the way

---

Just Kidding

Just Kidding

Thanks Flynn, And thanks G4mer. I get distracted from the site way too often.

I really like the logos you made G4mer, but I would rather see that abstraction as something small. Something like for buttons or SnarkPit Links or a banner for other sites. I like vector graphics for that reason. They're usually easier to read at a small scale.

For a primary logo, I'd want something a little rugged like what we've done before. Based on your redesigned logo on this version of the site, I kinda like redoing that to make it the new logo for V7.

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

How about something like this with your logo?:

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

Hey RIVEN, I like that.

Geeze,

Took you long enough to answer! Glad to see you find your way back! At this rate, maybe we can look at what font we want to use for the logo before the year 2031; won't that be exciting?

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

HAHAHAHA, I like how you put that on me... Do you have any suggestions, and any layout ideas for the new Snark Pit?

Riven said:
Geeze,

Took you long enough to answer! Glad to see you find your way back! At this rate, maybe we can look at what font we want to use for the logo before the year 2031; won't that be exciting?

The goal right now is to simply maintain the Pit. Our primary goal is to keep the Pit online and accessible for the foreseeable future. Right now, what this means is:

• Updating the code base to eliminate outdated code, features, and unused code libraries.
• Clean up security vulnerabilities.
• Make the site responsive so graphics and the interface scale appropriately with all various screen sizes.
• Put the site in a good place for future web updates, so it does not randomly break, or crash the server.

As for revamping the site with a new redesigned facelift: That's a different problem to solve, and requires a much more active user base to make this happen. The vision for the future of the SnarkPit would mean bringing a community together to discuss what the focus of the pit ought to be; and determining the place for a mapping forum on the web.

I'm not convinced the Pit has outlived its usefulness, but what's considered useful on the web these days takes many different forms; and it's not entirely clear to me where the focus has shifted to when it comes to game design. For instance: Do people care about building a community, or just getting an answer? The solution to that question, would take radically different forms depending on what we consider is the right focus.

In any case, no deadlines as of right now, but progress has been moving ahead on the first step of maintaining the Pit, which is a huge first step.

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202