HL2 mapping vs. HL1 mapping

Hey,

i was wondering if anyone else here sticks with HL1 mapping instead o hl2 mapping, i think hl2 mapping is boring, as it has way to much to do with props and stuff liek that, that makes the map just beeing a couple of blocks, with osme props, and it looks nice.

i like hl1 mapping more , becouse it's much more of a challenge to make it look good and nice, and it's way nice to add details be yourself instead of using all the props.

maybe when people have more custom textures this will change, but for now, it's way less fun and addictive ans hl1 mapping, i'm sticking to hl1 mapping, is anyone else too?

The harder mapping gets, the less I'll like it :razz:

I was surprised to hear that HL2 used the hammer system for mapping -- I figured some kind of insane program similar to UnrealEd was being used. As far as HL2 mapping difficulty goes for, I think it's pretty easy :smile: I also like how you are forced to work with a vmf -- no map file confusion! vis groups for all!

The prop thing is the mapping systems strength, yet weakness in my opinion. It's very easy to take pre-esembled models and toss them into your level. The problem is, is that HL2 is very model based, I doubt you could do all that same detail with just world brushes or func_walls (without driving your budget mad). That's where the problem lies though -- in order to get new props, you need to learn to model with XSI... Argh!

/rant

I enjoy HL2 mapping :smile: -- but I'd like to release some sven-coop1 maps before I move on to any major HL2 stuff.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting G.Ballblue</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>UnrealEd </DIV></DIV>

vomits profusely
Thank God Hammer and that...that...thing have nothing in common!

If you're relying upon props to make your maps look nice then you're doing a s**tty job. In my current map the majority of the detail is done with brushes, and it's perfectly fast. The engine can handle many more brushes than the old one as well, and with smart optimization and design you can keep FPS high.

Depends on the type of map you're making.

G.Ballblue said:
UnrealEd

vomits profusely

Thank God Hammer and that...that...thing have nothing in common!

Off topic: You must have never used the unreal ed then, because it is
much more powerful than hammer (and a lot of things are
simplified). They both use CSG and the unreal ed makes the CSG
constuction much easier, just watch the tutorials all over the
internet, and you will discover that the unreal ed is better (its just
hard to get used to). Same goes for the D³ editor (IN GAME LIGHTING
ROCKS).

Back to topic: the new hammer is nuch more user friendly, and its
simplified things a lot more. Like displacement surfaces are easy to do
compared to persay in the old hammer (where you would have to build it
brush by brush). The only thing I dont care about the new hammer, is
that it wont line up models to the grid, no matter what I do.

i like hl1 mapping more , becouse it's much more of a
challenge to make it look good and nice, and it's way nice to add
details be yourself instead of using all the props.

Why can't you just map the exact same way? Nowhere does it say that you
must use props. Half-life maps looked 'good' about four years ago.
While some are very impressive given the limitations of the engine,
they're way off what can be achieved in other engines.

TwoKnives:

fistly: i can not map normal becouse the texture aplication tool (one of he msot important htings of hammer) is slow as hell, and halfthe time my system crashes when i click it.

second, i think hl1 mapping is quicker nad more comfortable, if i make a hl1 map in hl2 it will look s**t becouse everyone is using 1000000 props to make their maps look good,

other than that:
Displacement tool is s**t in my opinion, becouse if you make like a hill, it's hard to even place props (<= argh!) on the ground PROPerly (<= eehw). i can make hilly terrain in hl1 just fine with triangle terrain.

HL1 maps do not looks bad compared to hl2 maps, you take half of the good hl1 maps and they are all better than the hl2 maps, only thing is that the textures etc. are way more detailed in hl2 and the graphics are nicer, but if you would look at the architecture , ost of the hl1 maps are way better than hl2 maps.
I've only seen like 3 good hl maps so far and they were made by good mappers, while i've seen some realy nice hl1 maps made by 'worse' mappers.

my conclusion is that hl1 mapping is not limited or whatever, and it still is better than hl2 mapping.

but that IS just my opinion

I like Half-Life 2 mapping better than Half-Life 1. Half-Life 1 was too restrictive.

[EDIT]

I had to edit this post after reading Biopulse's reply. You sir are
insane. Do not call Half-Life 2 mapping crappy just because your system
has a hard time running it. Props are used because the engine has an
easier time drawing models than bsp geometry and the displacement tool
is good for idiots like me who could never do triangle terrian.
Half-Life 2 mapping is much better than Half-Life 1. There are no
restrictions, and the main reason that many Half-Life 1 levels look
better than Half-Life 2 levels is because HL2 just came out. Give
people time to use the tools rather than demanding great quality work
in a short time.

Half-Life 1 has been out for five years. Half-Life 2 has been out for 2 months.

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.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Andrei</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Depends on the type of map you're making. </DIV></DIV>

Exactly. there are two types. 1) correct, and 2) incorrect.

the theme doesn't matter, if you map correctly, your map will always turn out fine.
if a map goes wrong, it was the authors fault, not the engines. do not exceed the limits and it will work OK.

BTW:

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>I will be beginning a map soon, one never attempted in all of HL history.</DIV></DIV>
:rolleyes: Hmm? Is that simply a gag or are you serious?

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Andrei</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>

BTW:

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>I will be beginning a map soon, one never attempted in all of HL history.</DIV></DIV>
:rolleyes: Hmm? Is that simply a gag or are you serious?

</DIV></DIV>

oh its serious, but i cannot seem to gain access to my mapping PC :biggrin:
my son says "but dad, we were gone 5 whole days going to oregon" :rolleyes:

I find that it would be very hard to make a sp mod with the monsters in HL 2. Think about it, you have soldiers that don't look humen, flying whales, zombies, headcrab varients, star ship trooper wana bees and helicopters, that's about it. Were in HL 1 you have about four different types of humen soldiers, and a wide range of alien types. In my opinion HL 1 is much more easy to make a mod out of without knowing how to make models. That's why I must use it to make Xenophobia.

how can you spell a word as big as xenophobia correctly, but you cannot spell human?

listen to me, the worst speller known :heee:

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting BioPulse</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Hey,

i was wondering if anyone else here sticks with HL1 mapping instead o hl2 mapping, i think hl2 mapping is boring, as it has way to much to do with props and stuff liek that, that makes the map just beeing a couple of blocks, with osme props, and it looks nice.

</DIV></DIV>
Nonsense, it's practically the same process as before but now you have these props to add detail to your levels- not to mention displacement surfaces! It is hard, and I am sorry that your PC currently isn't good enough to cope with mapping, but that's life for you :smile:

Thats why its called 'modding' half-dude.

TwoKnives:second, i think hl1 mapping is quicker nad more
comfortable, if i make a hl1 map in hl2 it will look s**t becouse
everyone is using 1000000 props to make their maps look good,

Good point except later on your post you say that HL1 maps look better than HL2 ones. Awesome word Dr. Contradiction! :rolleyes:

other than that:
Displacement tool is s**t in my opinion, becouse
if you make like a hill, it's hard to even place props (<= argh!) on
the ground PROPerly (<= eehw). i can make hilly terrain in hl1 just
fine with triangle terrain.

You can still use the old method. :rolleyes:

HL1 maps do not looks bad compared to hl2 maps, you take half of the
good hl1 maps and they are all better than the hl2 maps, only thing is
that the textures etc. are way more detailed in hl2 and the graphics
are nicer, but if you would look at the architecture , ost of the hl1
maps are way better than hl2 maps.
I've only seen like 3 good hl
maps so far and they were made by good mappers, while i've seen some
realy nice hl1 maps made by 'worse' mappers.

Halflife2 is barely out, of course there are no great maps. :rolleyes:

my conclusion is that hl1 mapping is not limited or whatever, and it still is better than hl2 mapping.

The grid is imited, the amount of entities, brushes, faces etc are all limited.

but that IS just my opinion

Newsflash: It's wrong.

Of course I'm just kidding and I don't care what you do, just keeping
up the appearance of being an ass. :wink: Oh and I wanted to abuse the
rolleyes smiley, which I'm ghey for. :biggrin:

I love the new entity I/O system. It makes things so much more
organized and clear. And props are pretty cool, also.
There's only so many soda machines and crates you can put in your HL1
level. Lighting is easier to use now that you can just point the
spot light wherever you want it to shine. Compile times are
exceptionally quicker, especially with the func_detail entity.
And then there's displacements, which I find to be a bitch to use but
when they're done right they look great. Oh and parenting is a
good new feature, as well. Soundscapes are cool as hell once you
figure them out. There's a lot of great new stuff.

The only thing I'd really give HL1 over HL2DM is gameplay. HL2DM is just not as strong as HL1DM.

I think HL2 Mapping Owns the s**t out of Hl1 Mapping. I LOVE the worldcraft/hammer interface, i love overlays, displacements, props of ALL kinds, and one thing i am absolutely gaga aobut is the fact that you can LINK entities to move with eachother, Like a swinging light AND it's light source swinging on a cable (realistically, too) I would say that just about anyone who likes HL1 mapping more than HL2 Is just afraid of change. These are probably the same ppl that are STILL whining about STEAM "having to connect every time" (even though I don't really care for it.) I think you have just got to get used to the changes and get on with your life. You know the original Half-Life is 6 years old!!! I'd say that mapping for it has a half-life of about 3 years-- meaning that it's dead. Move on.

Meaning its only 75% dead :razz: . 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.

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. :biggrin:

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting SaintGreg</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext> I think that the biggest problem with HL2 mapping is that its TOO similar to HL.</DIV></DIV>

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

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Andrei</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>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.

</DIV></DIV>

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

Doom3 and HL2 are coming for Quark -- yay!
Quark rules!

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.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting baalpeor</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>
Quark rules!

</DIV></DIV>

careful, quark is considered on par with "killbox"

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

cash, might beg to differ however :biggrin:
/runs

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting SaintGreg</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Meaning its only 75% dead :razz: . </DIV></DIV>
Damn you're right...

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 :biggrin:

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

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 :wink:

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.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting SaintGreg</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>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.
</DIV></DIV>

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.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting baalpeor</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>

Doom3 and HL2 are coming for Quark -- yay!

</DIV></DIV>
It's good to see that their site is being updated once again.

Anyone ever used "Qoole?"

Nope never heard of it :O

The great orph wrong :O

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.

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.

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.

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.

Don't forget the city 17 setting Myrk :razz: 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.

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.

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.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting habboi</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>

The great orph wrong :O

</DIV></DIV>

i wasn't aware that this particular topic had a wrong opinion. we are just bantering idea comparisons about HL1 and HL2.
its very rare that i am wrong about things, care to enlighten me?

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>its very rare that i am wrong about things, care to enlighten me?</DIV></DIV>

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting The Evening News</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>"... In other news, a Jonesboro man's head swelled to such a large size that he had to be hospitalized for neck injury. Reports say it's still growing. In weather today we have a cold front coming in from the..." </DIV></DIV>/runs

scratches a certain Missouri resident off of "to visit" list :heee:

i may be mistaken sometimes, but rarely outright wrong. :wink:

You did a good job there of trying to prove me wrong reno :razz: Found the most different maps you could possibly find, but the AG mod one doesn't count 'cus its a custom mod :razz:

I'm mainly talking in general though. Most maps tend to look extremely similar, you know what I mean, I know you do :biggrin:

/me is hoping to make the best roads eva for hl2 :biggrin:

i find it funny that i can map fine with the hl2 hammer , yet i cant
even run reflections in hl2 . Water looks a lot like milk :wink:

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting parakeet</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>i find it funny that i can map fine with the hl2 hammer , yet i cant even run reflections in hl2 . Water looks a lot like milk :wink:
</DIV></DIV>
MILK! mine too! WTF is up with that?

I spent hours tonight trying every single one of the water types in my
map, none of them look the way I want :sad: Ah well, just have to pick the
best and go with it.

Myrk, the AG2 might be a custom mod but the map uses entirely standard
resources and was originally for HL2DM, so your argument against it
isn't really valid :razz: I do know what you mean though, many do look the same, but that will stop as custom resources get out into the wild.

Yus true Renomonkee...

Have a cookie :biggrin:

Im new to mapping so I may be out of place here but here is what I see
happning to all editers in the future. I think all of them in time will
be very user friendly and easy to make maps. Thats the direction of the
world. How to make things simple. If you like the HL1 modding I guess
stay there and get left in the past with old tech. Or heres a great
bet. Make 2 maps one in the HL1 editor and the same one in the HL2
hammer and make me believe u can make it look better in HL1.