what makes a good mapper different from a great mapper

hey its me waco again, and i was wondering, when mapping, i was wondering what separates a bad mapper from a decent mapper, to a great mapper, be specific, i need some techniques to build upon, and also how did u go about learning all of the entities and techniques of architecture building. i would love to hear how you guys finish off maps without throwing them away, since i have this problem.. i know some of my half assed maps have potential, but i just halt halfway and stop.

95% of my maps never get shown at all. Those are my learning tools.

Just constant practice is the key. Get used to the fact that the sheer majority of your projects will never be finished and move on - the most important thing is to enjoy yourself and become a better mapper. But still, know when you should stick by a project and try to follow through to the end. Mod-work is good since it forces you into commitment at times.

Work process varies for levels, from mapper to mapper. Some people meticulously plan every little facet of the level, while others just open Hammer and throw down some brushes. It just depends on how you work. I know ReNo, for example, usually makes 1 detailed concept room to see if he likes the style, then will continue from there.

Learn the technical mechanics of mapping (making rooms, vertex manipulation, texture alignment) and make sure you're comfortable with using all of those tools. From there, it's just learning more tricks and opening your mind to different kinds / styles of design. Definately join a mod team to get some good experience (make sure you have a genuine interest in the mod though!) plus you'll meet new people.

I don't know about the difference between good mapper and a great mapper, but I do know that the difference between a good map and a great map is how much the mapper stuck with it and kept improving version after version after version instead of giving up and starting new.

I think it's also about accepting the fact that your first map(s) will not look as spanky as the maps you've seen from other, more experienced authors. It's really better to start with a blocky map, and learn from it.

yea and play other experienced peopls maps, it helps alot. yknow, there isnt some magical key that makes you a wicked mapper, as said, just map heaps.

-BB

It also helps to accept the fact that you aren't 100% correct about your own maps, accept criticism from others, and act upon it. You can't get too enamored with your own work and let personal pride get in the way. I've released two maps, Torque and Cataclysm, and in the first one I let myself become content with what I had and unwilling to change anything. I let a golden opportunity pass with that one, as it had the gameplay, but not the looks. For cataclysm when I was close to thinking it was finished people brought up the texturing and some other issues, and since I had learned from Torque I took it all to heart and totally retextured the map. It became far better because I forced myself to act on the criticism and accept that I may not know best in all situations.

Yah really, accept comments on your maps and aiming to improve. If you aim to improve your maps youll be a better mapper if you just stick to thinking your maps are the shiznit...theres nowhere to go.

i may of only released 1 map but i learned alot from critisism.

then again, i got alot of my "Help" from a half experianced mapper ( Kornflakes ). that helped alot because he pushed me into using the critisism not...... critisising it.

i have always found it better just to open valve and map, no art not concept no nothing. the proplem with that is half the time i will sit there and stare at the screen.

Making new maps and so on helps when learning but if you want to place in somthing different try looking up the tutorials.

A great mapper constantly outputs great maps where a good mapper has a few under his belt?

I've found, mainly what separates the "bad" from the "good" from the "great" is the detail of the map. A "bad" mapper will just chuck a bunch of blocks together. It might play good but it looks ugly (but thats ok, its a learning experience). The "good" mapper will improve on that, putting in little details such as door frames, beveled edges etc. The "great" mapper takes that extra care, does all sorts of nifty things that I cant think of right now :biggrin: .

Above all, if you want to be a better mapper, practise. As often as you can, for as long as you can.

Jsus, what can I add?! You guys have covered just about everything :biggrin:

A good mapper can create fun maps, while a great mapper can creat fun maps that look great.

Or a good mapper can create great looking maps, while a great mapper can make great looking maps that play well.

I disagree. Nipper, who has made well over two hundred fy maps, is respected on the CS forums except by a few simply because of his undeniable and prodigious creativity and ability to turn fun concepts into fun maps - albeit ugly ones.

The five factors of great mapping are:

1. Looks

2. Gameplay

3. Output

4. Support (ie their maps get played)

5. Originality

mazemaster said:
I don't know about the difference between good mapper and a great mapper, but I do know that the difference between a good map and a great map is how much the mapper stuck with it and kept improving version after version after version instead of giving up and starting new.

i reflect this sentiment whole heartedly, if only to add two things.. yaks comment about accepting you do NOT know whats best, and the fact that the amount of times someone plays your map does not in itself signify its greatness (killboxes)..

maze and yak sum up my total feelings on great... i know a few great mappers, sadly i know far more adequate ones :sad:

So whats wrong or sad about being an adequate mapper?. ( :smile: ).If all mappers were great, where would the thrill be in finding higher quality maps? Adequate mappers, IMO lay the groundwork for those who learn by seeing/doing, and choose to excell at it.I agree wholeheartedly about killboxes, most people do in fact keep their tastes in their mouths it seems, but I have had plenty of great firefights in adequate maps. Constructed well can still mean superb, even if not superior.

hmm, tired again, i assumed it was clear..

there is an intermediate step between great, and adequate.. quite a few of us lie within these boundaries..

when i said i know more adequate, it was because i have critiqued maps for far longer than i have been here at snarkpit.. i am not the best critiquer by any stretch of the word, but i didn't get this good by only doing great maps either.... as hard as it may be to believe, most of the old time greats, didn't trust my opinion.. took a long time but i finally got scary_1,gustavo, and Apo to cough up a few..

since i have been here? most of the guys who were my junior, have long since surpassed my pathetic attempts at editing..\

as the old saying goes, those who cannot map, teach.