[brullov]

Death Wish is amazing. Personally, I have not played anything better on Build Engine. It feels classic and innovative as top-notch user maps at the same time. Every level is interesting, there are no fillers. A great example to all of us for how we can approach the quality level.

[NNC]

oasiz, on 17 October 2020 - 01:00 AM, said:

This almost calls for a community(?) project where the goal wouldn't necessarily be creating an episode centered around one set theme but more about creating a "journey" across and attempting to relay the feel of the original story arc.
Making a classic map isn't too rough but it will require some rigorous direction so that things get used properly, there is a set guideline that guarantee many less used usermap things like actually interactable lights (switches & breakable).

I wonder what would be the best approach.. perhaps grinding blockouts and detail passes in a bit more lock-step manner.
It's harder to pull off when it gives designers less liberty do what they want, but it also would make sure that maps don't go overboard on some specific niche.

Without creativity nobody should even start mapping. That's the most important part. Maybe the people involved should go for a different kind of creativity. For example I think some new sector effectors, tags should be added and used, and also TROR should take an important place in such mapset to have a great feel of 3D.

[jkas789]

oasiz, on 17 October 2020 - 01:00 AM, said:

It's harder to pull off when it gives designers less liberty do what they want, but it also would make sure that maps don't go overboard on some specific niche.

I would argue that having less liberty in design (and in some cases even hardware) would make for some very creative level design and asset use.

[Sanek]

ck3D, on 16 October 2020 - 09:41 AM, said:

That's just totally normal though, give a creative tool to people and they'll be creative with it. People create according to their vision, Levelord and Blum had their respective styles just like every mapper is bound to develop theirs, they just happened to be the originals. What's to retain from their work isn't the specific styles or the aesthetics themselves but the science and logic they put into their level design.

I understand that creativity is king. But what I meant is that some user maps is so unique that it doesn't feel like it's part of game anyone. Perhaps it should be marked as positive for the authors of said maps. We all use Duke3D as the tool to express ourselves as artists, and most of the time we get highly creative with basic tileset (I remeber my jaw dropped when I first discovered that you're using a stool as the lamppost) but it feels like a completely different expierence from the original maps and maps that stick themselves to the aformentioned 3DR-like design. Roch series is a great set of user maps, but it looks and feels completely different from the classic maps (both official and user-made). I'm not saying it's bad. It's just...something else.

[oasiz]

jkas789, on 17 October 2020 - 06:03 AM, said:

I would argue that having less liberty in design (and in some cases even hardware) would make for some very creative level design and asset use.

Yes, there needs to be a consistent level of quality regardless of limitations.

"Less liberty" means here that there is a set design guideline and mappers wouldn't be able to wander off to do their own choices too much.
One example would be avoiding an usermap look where people try to forcefully twist existing assets to look like something new.
i.e. a store banner should have a custom sign and not rely on letter-sprites.
Effects, set pieces, etc.. should all be purpose-designed and not hacked around.

From what I recall, Duke3D had Greg doing a QA pass which apparently resulted in a lot of key improvements to the game.
He is not mentioned often but it's very important role.
This also means that if QA or "director" says that something sucks or doesn't fit then it needs to be changed or removed.

[ck3D]

Sanek, on 17 October 2020 - 10:07 AM, said:

I understand that creativity is king. But what I meant is that some user maps is so unique that it doesn't feel like it's part of game anyone. Perhaps it should be marked as positive for the authors of said maps. We all use Duke3D as the tool to express ourselves as artists, and most of the time we get highly creative with basic tileset (I remeber my jaw dropped when I first discovered that you're using a stool as the lamppost) but it feels like a completely different expierence from the original maps and maps that stick themselves to the aformentioned 3DR-like design. Roch series is a great set of user maps, but it looks and feels completely different from the classic maps (both official and user-made). I'm not saying it's bad. It's just...something else.

Yes I agree with that, but of course those maps aren't going to feel part of the game since they aren't, and are something else because, well, they are. They weren't made by the same people nor in the same context (1995 technology), and most importantly, since user mappers are by essence recycling the assets of the original game (unless they come up with new .art of their own), in reality it's almost impossible to create something that'd feel more genuine than the original levels, since those were the material said assets were literally designed for; they were tailor-fit for them and thus every new use of them is either going to be a derivation or a recreation. In reality one could retro-engineer and study everything about the original Duke 3D level design tradition to start pumping out strict variations on the base game levels, but there is a good reason why not many are doing it: it puts a burden on the creativity both the creators want to inject into their work and the players themselves really want to see in a map, but don't know it yet. That's only why I'm specifying that retaining the science is better than copying the form. In a way, remaking Hollywood Holocaust wouldn't be the pinnacle of level design on the very basis that Hollywood Holocaust already exists; by definition you'd need new elements, or a new theme (that would also recycle old assets). You also have to see the other side of the coin when a quite classic-scaled and -feeling map drops (a rare happening these days indeed), and most people look past it because the experience looks too redundant with what they've played before (I feel like a lot of people actually avoided Fernando Marquez's work because of the repetition with the base game instead of being drawn to it for it), or even reviewing sites calling the style 'unambitious' (when you think about it, many trends in the history of Duke 3D mapping were actually dictated by a few people's tastes).

'User maps' (it's in the name) can and will always only be an interpretative twist or variation of the base game so it's only logical that they feel different, unless it's one of the original authors who makes them with new canon assets and even then, World Tour has proven to us that with access to modern technology, they're willing to make things differently now than they used to, back in times we can happen to mythify.

What I do agree on, though, is there are very few community episodes out as now, almost three decades into the existence of the game that even try feeling close to canon, but maybe that was the time needed for most people to catch up with both the technical skills to express their vision and the spirit of the original game. Or maybe in a way, there wasn't much to revive as long as people kept believing the spirit of the franchise lived on, but now that many are hopeless when it comes to its official future, they're suddenly relying on the community a bit more seriously to keep it going (which is honestly a pretty cool shift).

[Aleks]

This thread made me realise that Duke is so old that it not only developed different art trends of its own, but that some of these trends are already having their renaissance - can we call it neoclassicism at this point?

[NNC]

I started playing FM3X episode, Anarchy Village (this is my first time I touched Duke 3D since the PnP release last year, probably the result of this ongoing discussion). I play the version of MSDN FM4X, which also has a 4th episode. While I didn't like the first level (it had merits, but didn't look that great), the second and third levels however are very interesting and use really original and good looking themes. I'm on the third level (Boiler Cliff) now and finished it, but I won't leave until I know how to activate the shrinker puzzle for the red key. I managed to get a jetpack down in a secret place next to the lava, so the map is beatable, but the shrinker is blocked in the first window, I guess you have to unblock it or whatever as it doesn't help you in this short range. I destroyed the tree as well, so it's not the problem. Pipeline's Mothership level had a similar puzzle, but it worked (at least in the v1.3d version where ceiling aligned switches were shootable).

As for the levels, there are some surprising creativity in them, and the original style is kept intact, so this might qualify. But those goddamn puzzles. For example in the helicopter level had two very important switches in hard to see places, and Nando used the worst possible monster (sentry drone) to reveal the second one (multiple switches). It didn't work, and I was wandering hopelessly for 10-10 minutes for each before I visited a Youtube walkthrough. Also some keycards can be forgotten behind as they are in very dark places without clues. Also in the first level there was a huge and annoying ammo starvation early on, drones blasted in my face in a cramped area, the map really started kicking when you got the chaingun, but was pain in the ass before it.

It's so maddening honestly. You had great looking maps, original ideas, fun gameplay, only to ruin it with easy to avoid shit. Honestly, it's quite typical. I will continue the episode though, I guess there will some more interesting levels here and in the 4th episode.

In short: any help for the shrinker puzzle is welcome.

EDIT: got it. The current EDuke32 snapshot has a bug.

[jkas789]

ck3D, on 17 October 2020 - 11:20 AM, said:

What I do agree on, though, is there are very few community episodes out as now, almost three decades into the existence of the game that even try feeling close to canon, but maybe that was the time needed for most people to catch up with both the technical skills to express their vision and the spirit of the original game. Or maybe in a way, there wasn't much to revive as long as people kept believing the spirit of the franchise lived on, but now that many are hopeless when it comes to its official future, they're suddenly relying on the community a bit more seriously to keep it going (which is honestly a pretty cool shift).

I think it's a little bit of both. As far as I understand mapping for the build engine is an art unto itself, without considering levels design. Also I think in many ways the development and legend of Duke Nukem Forever stifled the need of the community for it own "vanilla like" content. Doom 1 and 2 came relatively close to each other, and were than left on their own to the community by ID as they moved on to Quake. By the time Doom 3 came by ID had already produced 3 other games which were themselves something like spiritual successors to Doom. And from the very start Doom 3 was marketed a a reboot, not a continuation of the series.

On the other hand we have Duke nukem forever with the already known dev problems and the fact that everytime they mentioned it it was hyped so damn much! It became a meme like half life 3. I honestly believe that even if we had gotten the "2001 build", or the "2009 build" or whatever version you want to talk about it would have been hailed with mediocrity at the end.

Why make something like vanilla, if we are going to get Duke Nukem Forever? Which will have better level design, gameplay and will give me a blowjob!

In contrast Doom 1 and 2 fans got the memo 5 years earlier to DNF's release that if their franchise ever came back after Doom 3 it would be different than what they expected, and so they got to keeping their ecosystem alive. If you look at the evolution of doom mapping you can see this line of thinking what with vanilla like, vanilla +, quake like, other fps like, artsy stuff that made Graff mad, and they went and circled again to nostalgia vanilla +. Now they are at the artsy/modern sensibilities stage. Duke Nukem went from what I have seen so far (and this may be a wrong take) from 0 to 11 quite fast in terms of level design. It never went through that period period of nostalgia, at least until DNF came out.

Granted I may be totally wrong with this take, after all I'm a recent on and off lurker turned poster. So... ┐(‘～` )┌

[necroslut]

There were the occasional maps that went for a more "Realms-like" style, but they always got overshadowed by more "impressive" stuff like Roch (which I don't care for at all) until more recent years. Metropolitan Mayhem was one of the first to attempt "old school style" and gain some more attention as far as I remember. Though, of course, attempting to do old-school and actually succeeding are two different things and can explain some of the indifference...

I think a lot of usermaps, whether they try to look old-school or not, lack the restraint that is displayed in the original game. Duke it out in DC falls a bit into this trap too. While it can be argued that that restraint came from performance or budget limitations, I do believe it really made the game better, in a similar way to many older games. Fans still frequently try to go for the "large city sandbox" that 3DR threw out after LameDuke.

As for the original question, DNF 2013 is probably one to come closest -- although there are some really jarring bits like the music as well as various things that make zero sense outside of trying to recreate the original promo materials. Still, the maps are fairly "Realms-like" (although a bit more linear and lacking in secrets and interactivity), new art that could for the most part have been in an official expansion, it has new/modified weapons that fit well and new enemies of fairly good quality.

[ck3D]

necroslut, on 18 October 2020 - 05:36 PM, said:

Metropolitan Mayhem was one of the first to attempt "old school style" and gain some more attention as far as I remember. Though, of course, attempting to do old-school and actually succeeding are two different things and can explain some of the indifference...

I appreciate you appreciating this. Paying tribute (the way we could) to the original levels was the primary reason behind that project, and something no one was really doing at the time (everyone was caught up in It Lives, etc., I actually remember quite a few people including Gambini expressing that the release of MM briefly made them reconsider their appreciation for the base game). Now of course, most everyone involved in MM has admitted it before (on here, too) that we didn't have a very good grasp on all the subtleties that made the original levels work they way they did, at the time. Maybe most people didn't back then, too, because the community in general had had a lot less past user map designs to study, and learn lessons from (it was almost a decade ago). Eventually for MM, we kept it relatively simple but also clung onto some artistic freedom as well as broke a few 'rules' so the final product actually wasn't that much of a DTWID-type of project. It has its flaws that have rightfully been pointed out on here recently, but I like to think that culturally it might have played some kind of role as it reminded some that Duke 3D maps didn't have to be realistic-looking and could just be some simple fun (maybe it also coincided with the time frame where people stopped hoping to make Duke 3D look as realistic as modern games in general).

The LameDuke big city sandbox style thing is actually really interesting, the fact that that style was historically the first approach of the original level designers, and the general interest to this day for those old levels, beta leaks with uncut versions, or user maps in that style proves that even if it's not the most practical way to play the game, there is some kind of undying demand for it. Admittedly I personally don't think the sandbox style is bad in Duke per se, it's just that most of the sandbox-type maps out there aren't optimally designed to work with it (too flat with barely any meaningful use of the vertical space, low visibility, bad monster placement with unfair hitscanners, etc.).

[NNC]

necroslut, on 18 October 2020 - 05:36 PM, said:

There were the occasional maps that went for a more "Realms-like" style, but they always got overshadowed by more "impressive" stuff like Roch (which I don't care for at all) until more recent years. Metropolitan Mayhem was one of the first to attempt "old school style" and gain some more attention as far as I remember. Though, of course, attempting to do old-school and actually succeeding are two different things and can explain some of the indifference...

I think a lot of usermaps, whether they try to look old-school or not, lack the restraint that is displayed in the original game. Duke it out in DC falls a bit into this trap too. While it can be argued that that restraint came from performance or budget limitations, I do believe it really made the game better, in a similar way to many older games. Fans still frequently try to go for the "large city sandbox" that 3DR threw out after LameDuke.

As for the original question, DNF 2013 is probably one to come closest -- although there are some really jarring bits like the music as well as various things that make zero sense outside of trying to recreate the original promo materials. Still, the maps are fairly "Realms-like" (although a bit more linear and lacking in secrets and interactivity), new art that could for the most part have been in an official expansion, it has new/modified weapons that fit well and new enemies of fairly good quality.

I think the problem is how they focus on things that are less important, especially the micromanagement the enviromental design, while often don't care about stuff like good flow in the gameplay.

I played Anarchy Village up to the 7th level now (Crescent Inn), and I'm seriously considering to continue this to end or not. The episode is a flat out torment to play despite the good ideas pop up in most levels. First of all, every level has the size for 20-30 minute gameplay, which is way too long, it can work once or twice in a truly epic level like Derelict or Dark Side, but when you have that size all the time, it eventually ends up a neverending chore. Also, most levels are as dark as E1L2 famous dark room all the time, just without reasons, I honestly can't see shit more often than not. In addition, some hallways are cramped, and sprites are everywhere to block your movement, which can be frustrating when you go through such places as the non escapable underwater section in Jungle Bay with a critical shortage of scuba gears or in a haunted house, where the darkness and the blocking sprites made a more deadly combo than the Battlelord that pops ahead of your face. In addition, puzzles and progression were very annoying, layouts were often confusing and sprawling, you don't know where to push a horrific face for a keycard, or have to activate all light switches to succeed and so on. Keycards are also in dark areas, you can easily miss them the first time you goes through the level.

And btw., talking about houses: House maps (inside) suck. With all those irrelevant details, when stuff like refridgerators are built from textures and sprites that weren't exactly designed for this (actually World Tour had this issue too in Levelord's maps), houses with all micro-details are a no go for me. They are not fun to play with random cramped rooms to visit, they don't give any sense of progressing, and they are usually ugly. That is why I still think Boiler Cliffs was by far and away the best map in Anarchy Village (followed by Helicopter Road), because it doesn't have this inside the house and inside the bar nonsense. I appreciate Ian Boffin more now, when he managed to make Gates Motel, and while it had some progression issues, the relative emptiness of the rooms made it a much more formidable and intuitive map than all the overdetailed ones.

It's a damn shame, because mappers like Fernando have the capability to build special stuff. Some of the ideas were amazing and have a great sense of space. And they are ruined by unnecessary shit. I remember having a bad mouthed flamewar with Jimmy about George Broussard, but honestly he might have been right about him. I guess he was quite important factor that Duke end up being Duke, and mappers didn't overdo themselves.

[Mark]

I make indoor spaces and load them with models for eye candy. But I make sure that the player doesn't trip or get stuck on stuff. I block off around tables, chairs, counters ,and appliances so the player can't jump up on anything or get stuck. Its basically like moving around in an open floor sector.

[ck3D]

As someone who notoriously used to make some of the most cramped rooms for Duke 3D ever, I can confirm that optimal use of space is important, I was bringing it up just the other day in another thread commenting on how wrong it was even just to use F7 in game for scaling (despite how that's recommended in the tutorials): Duke's movement is NOT realistic, he's faster than an athlete (and on steroids is ridiculous), can fly around and jump his own height with a single key press. So his environment has got to be tailor-fit for stuff not to get in the way, and built on a slightly larger scale; it's a common mistake to try and recreate a real-world place on its real-life scale when in reality it should be translated over to the game physics. Oversized rooms are only a common beginner's mistake because in game they do make sense, it's when people start focusing on pseudo-photorealism that they usually start scaling stuff down, when they probably shouldn't as, with the right aesthetics, it's very possible to disguise the oversized environment so consistently that it becomes credible, all the while working with how the game plays (just E1 and E3 in the base game are a demonstration of that, crates being six feet tall for the player to be able to get proper cover, etc.). Form follows function, I used not to care about this aspect of the flow of levels but these days it's one of my priorities, and it's actually pretty easy to see whether or not your little sprite table thing is going to get in the way of the layout of your room, that's when the author just needs to accept it and at least move it instead of thinking 'ehhh, but I like the look of the table there'.

[Danukem]

ck3D, on 19 October 2020 - 10:59 AM, said:

As someone who notoriously used to make some of the most cramped rooms for Duke 3D ever, I can confirm that optimal use of space is important, I was bringing it up just the other day in another thread commenting on how wrong it was even just to use F7 in game for scaling (despite how that's recommended in the tutorials): Duke's movement is NOT realistic, he's faster than an athlete (and on steroids is ridiculous), can fly around and jump his own height with a single key press. So his environment has got to be tailor-fit for stuff not to get in the way, and built on a slightly larger scale

Not only that, but his sprite is kind of short. His size is 42xrepeat, 36yrepeat. Whereas most enemies are 40 yrepeat. The way he runs around like a maniac and he's kind of short, I think of him as a stocky Tom Cruise. But in all media he's always portrayed as this super big tall guy. Go figure.

[ck3D]

lol, I feel like there's a couple of memes just waiting to happen there, but you're right. About the practical in-game scaling thing, sometimes it's also cool to build stuff that's obviously a tad off, for instance to hint to secret places. For example, a phone box that's just a bit too high for a person to realistically be able to conveniently grab the phone can catch the attention of the player, and then when they use it as a platform to get some place that's higher up you reward them with a secret (one of the maps for my project has that in particular, but there are a gazillion of smart ways of playing with the scale). Realism can be great as long as it's practical, except the line is thin and a lot of times you're just better off going abstract, it's not like we're not dealing with a game in which you start the very first level by jumping off a building to then land exactly atop of some random medication. It's better to just think of most every single thing in the map you're making as a potential gameplay element, and a bunch of disguised props really meant for cover and vertical exploration. And then if you're going to make anything superfluous, just make sure it doesn't physically get in the way in a pointless manner.

[Fernando Marquez]

The Watchtower, on 19 October 2020 - 08:18 AM, said:

It's a damn shame, because mappers like Fernando have the capability to build special stuff. Some of the ideas were amazing and have a great sense of space. And they are ruined by unnecessary shit. I remember having a bad mouthed flamewar with Jimmy about George Broussard, but honestly he might have been right about him. I guess he was quite important factor that Duke end up being Duke, and mappers didn't overdo themselves.

I really don't know if to take this as a nice compliment, or a truly insulting banner.

Honestly, after reading all your rant about my episodes, I will just say I don't really care about the opinions of you, or even others. If you like my levels or not, that's fine by me, and I will sleep fine anyways if you don't like them, since that's the conclusion I get from you. But I won't stay quiet without some defense.
Even though reading your comments slump me as a fuck up in terms of gameplay design and craft, I'm very proud of what I have done. Besides, mapping for Duke and having to craft nearly 70 levels for a pack is draining. I'm not as young as I was and not even as creative when I was in my adolescence.

I still think it's wonderful my levels give a lot to talk about, but the real purpouse of making these levels were to provide a simple bunch of levels for the community to play. The fact you are bashing them mercilessly won't leave me restless on my laurels.

[NNC]

Fernando Marquez, on 19 October 2020 - 11:30 AM, said:

I really don't know if to take this as a nice compliment, or a truly insulting banner.

Honestly, after reading all your rant about my episodes, I will just say I don't really care about the opinions of you, or even others. If you like my levels or not, that's fine by me, and I will sleep fine anyways if you don't like them, since that's the conclusion I get from you. But I won't stay quiet without some defense.
Even though reading your comments slump me as a fuck up in terms of gameplay design and craft, I'm very proud of what I have done. Besides, mapping for Duke and having to craft nearly 70 levels for a pack is draining. I'm not as young as I was and not even as creative when I was in my adolescence.

I still think it's wonderful my levels give a lot to talk about, but the real purpouse of making these levels were to provide a simple bunch of levels for the community to play. The fact you are bashing them mercilessly won't leave me restless on my laurels.

Sorry man, if you are interpreting my comments this way. I played the maps today, so every impression is fresh now. What might be the biggest compliment that I installed Duke again after 2 years of non playing (not counting PnP release last year) just to play YOUR maps, and that was AFTER I saw some videos of them. And while I highlighted the problems in a "merciless" way, that doesn't mean I wasn't impressed by stuff I saw. In fact this was the main reason of my rant: You did the hard part very well, created fresh and memorable locations from scratch with classic style, used 3D height variety very well, I mean the first 90% of the job was so good, than lost it in the last 10%. For example less blocking sprites, less total darkness would have been magic for your levels, or adding a third scuba gear in a non escapable water maze, these are the minor things honestly. There were some great ideas, I was legitimately jump scared at the phony cyclops in Ghost House, and so on, so on.

I hope you will continue mapping in this style, just a bit more space, visibility and less confusing puzzles would make it like 150% better. Cheers!

PS: Btw. you are much more creative now than in your adolescence years. Most pros are aged over 30 or even 40, teens just play with the editor and do their shit or copy from others without understanding, adults use their experiences well to their advantage, also their ideas are more elaborated (because of their time limit).

[ck3D]

If you allow me to chime in, I don't think you should take it personally, Fernando. The Watchtower is a critic who notoriously speaks on here unadulterated, but that's also without being shy about how he knows his tastes are particular. Just like you've always had a strong vision of what you like about the game, he's the same, just differently and from the perspective of a pure player, what he appreciates seeing in Duke maps is a handful of very specific aspects - which is exactly why I think his comments are often interesting. You have all the right in the world to be proud of your hard work, and I don't think The Watchtower's comments especially paint it in a black light, in fact I've seen him reiterate how amazing it is that even what he doesn't happen to like exists a few times in this thread. Truth is, there are always going to be strengths and weaknesses to everything, which is what shapes works and styles, regardless of general quality. And it's up to the author to not just accept, but embrace the possibility of both, in order to really get to be proud of their work for what it is. If driven to, I'm sure you would be able to justify most of your design and stylistic choices and discuss your approach, and add to this whole discussion; there's no point in letting negative feedback get to you like this.

[Aleks]

While I generally like Watchtower's detailed and in-depth comments about most stuff, pretty uncompromising stance on Duke level, the comment above is quite narrow-minded in my opinion, it almost suggests he's demanding a level especially tailored for his likes. I haven't played Fernando's episodes (although the more discussion arises around them, the more I'm tempted to play, just gotta find the "optimal" Eduke build so I don't get blocked in the middle of something), but they sound and look (from the screenshots) like quite classic styled and with rather demanding puzzles.

Now when we're on it, a lot of older levels from the late 90's and early 2000's had this issue, that all you had to do was button hunting and sometimes the buttons were hidden in very unintuitive places. That's one of the main things stopping the players from experiencing the "pure flow" of the game I guess. I remember as a kid even getting stuck on some of the original levels (most notably Babe Land with that targets puzzle - especially with locating the red key inside a secret place, the first time I only found it by accident after starting to shoot the things out of boredom/frustration). What I'm trying to say is that usually better aesthetic design/detailed levels are also more intuitive, as even the more difficult puzzles can make use of more everyday logic instead.

And second thing, which I find straight unfair, is the equation between detailed and cramped levels. In fact I mostly found cramped places that are disturbances in gameplay in these "newbie" levels, while for examples ck3D's more detailed levels I found great in terms of gameplay (still haven't played them all, but "Happy Hangover" is my favourite so far and it had tremendous detail). So generally, I don't think these two aspects are contrary to eachother - of course there are different styles of gameplay I guess and I can't see a point of having high-detail in a Dukematch level where you have to focus on survival all the time, but while playing single player I tend to pay greater attention to design rather than gameplay alone (gameplay has to be balanced in challenging of course, some battles can be very memorable, but it's still mostly design that stands out after all and makes me remember a level). And for me it's been like that ever since trying out the first quality levels like Roch, Alejandro's, Bob Averill's and Kef's stuff I guess. It's been like putting my favourite game on a completely new level.

As for the scale thing, yeah, F7 view doesn't really correspond to Duke's FPP perspective and makes him a short chump - I really like the Tom Cruise comparison! But then I more often see levels which are largely overscaled or scaled without consequence throughout the level than underscaled TBH. One good hint for mappers would be the height at which the buttons should be located for natural use from standing position, which is 6 "page ups" (6144 build units) from the ground. Also the fact how most textures scale can be a good direction (i.e. making 8 "page ups" high boxes, so the textures on the sides scale fully).

[NNC]

ck3D, on 19 October 2020 - 11:51 AM, said:

If you allow me to chime in, I don't think you should take it personally, Fernando. The Watchtower is a critic who notoriously speaks on here unadulterated, but that's also without being shy about how he knows his tastes are particular. Just like you've always had a strong vision of what you like about the game, he's the same, just differently and from the perspective of a pure player, what he appreciates seeing in Duke maps is a handful of very specific aspects - which is exactly why I think his comments are often interesting. You have all the right in the world to be proud of your hard work, and I don't think The Watchtower's comments especially paint it in a black light, in fact I've seen him reiterate how amazing it is that even what he doesn't happen to like exists a few times in this thread. Truth is, there are always going to be strengths and weaknesses to everything, which is what shapes works and styles, regardless of general quality. And it's up to the author to not just accept, but embrace the possibility of both, in order to really get to be proud of their work for what it is. If driven to, I'm sure you would be able to justify most of your design and stylistic choices and discuss your approach, and add to this whole discussion; there's no point in letting negative feedback get to you like this.

Yeah, the difference is probably one is a player's vision and the other is a mapper's. I'm glad stuff like Fernando's episodes or stuff I didn't try like AMC TC exist. I wish there are more of them honestly, this community is critically small. And the main intent of my unadultered rants are to help people who are talented to build even better stuff in the future.

[Jimmy]

necroslut, on 18 October 2020 - 05:36 PM, said:

As for the original question, DNF 2013 is probably one to come closest -- although there are some really jarring bits like the music as well as various things that make zero sense outside of trying to recreate the original promo materials. Still, the maps are fairly "Realms-like" (although a bit more linear and lacking in secrets and interactivity), new art that could for the most part have been in an official expansion, it has new/modified weapons that fit well and new enemies of fairly good quality.

I heavily disagree with this. I've always found this mod very jarring. The new art is pretty mish mash. Most of the level specific stuff fits pretty well, but stuff like the donkey and the new Shrinker just scream "user made content." Don't even get me started on the "DLC" shotgun. I don't see why any of the Duke3D weapons had to have new art; DNF has pretty much the same weapons. When I played it, I literally went in there and removed the weapon art myself. It's so distracting and unnecessary. The new enemies were alright, but I don't like how many of them outright replaced classic enemies. There was an imbalance in enemy placement because of this. Also the random palswap Enforcers in the Dam are just awful. I don't know. I don't hate the mod, but I feel it's quite overrated. The levels are pretty but overall it's quite boring, most of the mod is spent moving from set-piece to set-piece, with very few or even no enemies because it wants you to see a scripted event or something. Funnily enough it spends so much time trying to recreate things from trailers that it ends up having most of the faults that the actual DNF has. I wouldn't dissuade anyone from playing it, but it doesn't fit the 3DR style at all really. I know this is a hot take and most people won't agree with me but whatever.

The Watchtower, on 19 October 2020 - 08:18 AM, said:

It's a damn shame, because mappers like Fernando have the capability to build special stuff. Some of the ideas were amazing and have a great sense of space. And they are ruined by unnecessary shit. I remember having a bad mouthed flamewar with Jimmy about George Broussard, but honestly he might have been right about him. I guess he was quite important factor that Duke end up being Duke, and mappers didn't overdo themselves.

The key to the flamewar is that it implants a little seed in your mind, you don't even realize it at the time. Slowly the idea grows and you think about it more. Cheers.

[ck3D]

Aleks, on 19 October 2020 - 12:01 PM, said:

And second thing, which I find straight unfair, is the equation between detailed and cramped levels. In fact I mostly found cramped places that are disturbances in gameplay in these "newbie" levels, while for examples ck3D's more detailed levels I found great in terms of gameplay (still haven't played them all, but "Happy Hangover" is my favourite so far and it had tremendous detail). So generally, I don't think these two aspects are contrary to eachother

They're not, like many things that look like opposites at first they're actually complementary, as every map is bound to be part looks and part practical design. There's room for every style, but it's true that it can easily be felt while playing a level whether it was built with the gameplay or the aesthetics in mind first.

Thanks on the kind words on Happy Hangover, around that time period I was already starting to make it a point not to have too much clutter in the way, although I was still building stuff on a somewhat small and narrow scale and only used the vertical axis sporadically throughout the map. Also the progression in my maps from that time period (and in most of them all the way to Poison Heart including Poison Heart, to be honest - on varying levels) was always plagued by something else: quite the amount of nonsensical navigation and puzzles, that I had probably inherited from playing too many user maps, funnily enough. These days I try to make sure that as much of the decoration in my levels as possible is also functional in some way, or I think it up depending on what kind of action I want this room or that section to hold and not the other way around. Which doesn't mean it has to look bare or unrealistic, either. In a way it's kind of akin to the pursuit of making optimal use of every resource spent.

The Watchtower, on 19 October 2020 - 12:08 PM, said:

Yeah, the difference is probably one is a player's vision and the other is a mapper's. I'm glad stuff like Fernando's episodes or stuff I didn't try like AMC TC exist. I wish there are more of them honestly, this community is critically small. And the main intent of my unadultered rants are to help people who are talented to build even better stuff in the future.

Maybe it's also that since Fernando has 70 levels out, unless he keeps going at it at the same pace for 20 more years which I don't think he intends to, his main body of work is in the past, so he can only really get so much out of constructive criticism for the future; either way for one I hope you keep it up, I think your plan is already working in general just from seeing how many discussions pertaining to level design your posts have started.

[necroslut]

ck3D, on 19 October 2020 - 04:03 AM, said:

I appreciate you appreciating this. Paying tribute (the way we could) to the original levels was the primary reason behind that project, and something no one was really doing at the time (everyone was caught up in It Lives, etc., I actually remember quite a few people including Gambini expressing that the release of MM briefly made them reconsider their appreciation for the base game). Now of course, most everyone involved in MM has admitted it before (on here, too) that we didn't have a very good grasp on all the subtleties that made the original levels work they way they did, at the time. Maybe most people didn't back then, too, because the community in general had had a lot less past user map designs to study, and learn lessons from (it was almost a decade ago). Eventually for MM, we kept it relatively simple but also clung onto some artistic freedom as well as broke a few 'rules' so the final product actually wasn't that much of a DTWID-type of project. It has its flaws that have rightfully been pointed out on here recently, but I like to think that culturally it might have played some kind of role as it reminded some that Duke 3D maps didn't have to be realistic-looking and could just be some simple fun (maybe it also coincided with the time frame where people stopped hoping to make Duke 3D look as realistic as modern games in general).

The way I remember it, I do see it as a sort of turning point with regards to moving away from "Build porn" (and I'm tempted to include stuff like Roch here). Build porn can be interesting in its own right, and knowing Build can be impressive to see how mappers push the limits, but it rarely works as a gameplay experience as opposed to a showcase of what can be done but maybe, if you're trying to make something of interest to people other than Build mappers, shouldn't.

Quote

The LameDuke big city sandbox style thing is actually really interesting, the fact that that style was historically the first approach of the original level designers, and the general interest to this day for those old levels, beta leaks with uncut versions, or user maps in that style proves that even if it's not the most practical way to play the game, there is some kind of undying demand for it. Admittedly I personally don't think the sandbox style is bad in Duke per se, it's just that most of the sandbox-type maps out there aren't optimally designed to work with it (too flat with barely any meaningful use of the vertical space, low visibility, bad monster placement with unfair hitscanners, etc.).

I think the appeal of the "big city sandbox" goes well beyond just Duke 3D -- it's a core part of games like GTA, Saints Row etc... and, with it basically being a flat square area with a bunch of symmetrically spread out blocks, isn't that interesting there either...

The Watchtower, on 19 October 2020 - 08:18 AM, said:

I think the problem is how they focus on things that are less important, especially the micromanagement the enviromental design, while often don't care about stuff like good flow in the gameplay.

I played Anarchy Village up to the 7th level now (Crescent Inn), and I'm seriously considering to continue this to end or not. The episode is a flat out torment to play despite the good ideas pop up in most levels. First of all, every level has the size for 20-30 minute gameplay, which is way too long, it can work once or twice in a truly epic level like Derelict or Dark Side, but when you have that size all the time, it eventually ends up a neverending chore.

restraint

Quote

Also, most levels are as dark as E1L2 famous dark room all the time, just without reasons, I honestly can't see shit more often than not.

restraint

Quote

In addition, some hallways are cramped, and sprites are everywhere to block your movement,

restraint

Quote

which can be frustrating when you go through such places as the non escapable underwater section in Jungle Bay with a critical shortage of scuba gears or in a haunted house, where the darkness and the blocking sprites made a more deadly combo than the Battlelord that pops ahead of your face. In addition, puzzles and progression were very annoying, layouts were often confusing and sprawling,

restraint

I could go on, but you get the point, I think. The way I see it, restraint and focus are very tightly linked together. Without a fancy surface a layout and gameplay has to stand on its own.

Quote

It's a damn shame, because mappers like Fernando have the capability to build special stuff. Some of the ideas were amazing and have a great sense of space. And they are ruined by unnecessary shit. I remember having a bad mouthed flamewar with Jimmy about George Broussard, but honestly he might have been right about him. I guess he was quite important factor that Duke end up being Duke, and mappers didn't overdo themselves.

Direction is super important to make the final product actually work, just like with movies or any other medium. And in every area -- not just mapping. Artists, writers, programmers -- anyone focusing on one single area rather than the whole tends to go overboard with detail. They might create something that works great seen on its own, but as a part of something larger will work against the whole rather than help it.

ck3D, on 19 October 2020 - 10:59 AM, said:

As someone who notoriously used to make some of the most cramped rooms for Duke 3D ever, I can confirm that optimal use of space is important, I was bringing it up just the other day in another thread commenting on how wrong it was even just to use F7 in game for scaling (despite how that's recommended in the tutorials): Duke's movement is NOT realistic, he's faster than an athlete (and on steroids is ridiculous), can fly around and jump his own height with a single key press. So his environment has got to be tailor-fit for stuff not to get in the way, and built on a slightly larger scale; it's a common mistake to try and recreate a real-world place on its real-life scale when in reality it should be translated over to the game physics. Oversized rooms are only a common beginner's mistake because in game they do make sense, it's when people start focusing on pseudo-photorealism that they usually start scaling stuff down, when they probably shouldn't as, with the right aesthetics, it's very possible to disguise the oversized environment so consistently that it becomes credible, all the while working with how the game plays (just E1 and E3 in the base game are a demonstration of that, crates being six feet tall for the player to be able to get proper cover, etc.). Form follows function, I used not to care about this aspect of the flow of levels but these days it's one of my priorities, and it's actually pretty easy to see whether or not your little sprite table thing is going to get in the way of the layout of your room, that's when the author just needs to accept it and at least move it instead of thinking 'ehhh, but I like the look of the table there'.

I think this doesn't apply just to Duke 3D. Even in games with slower and more constricted movement than Duke, you still tend to control like a dresser on a skateboard.
There's also the matter that real life locations tend to have a lot of repetition. I'm sure I'm not the only person who have tried to make a "realistic" cinema level with 6 showrooms, twenty rows of seats in each one, etc, and they're all pretty much the same... Compared to E1L1's cinema, or the porn shop in E1L2, where they repeat things just enough to get the feeling across, but not more, because repetition isn't really that fun or interesting. It's another of those abstraction things that work much worse the more realistic (and detailed) you try to make the graphics.

Danukem, on 19 October 2020 - 11:02 AM, said:

Not only that, but his sprite is kind of short. His size is 42xrepeat, 36yrepeat. Whereas most enemies are 40 yrepeat. The way he runs around like a maniac and he's kind of short, I think of him as a stocky Tom Cruise. But in all media he's always portrayed as this super big tall guy. Go figure.

There is a joke about this in DNF. Also, his eyes are in his neck... That makes scaling some things a bit difficult.

Jimmy, on 19 October 2020 - 12:08 PM, said:

I heavily disagree with this. I've always found this mod very jarring. The new art is pretty mish mash. Most of the level specific stuff fits pretty well, but stuff like the donkey and the new Shrinker just scream "user made content." Don't even get me started on the "DLC" shotgun. I don't see why any of the Duke3D weapons had to have new art; DNF has pretty much the same weapons. When I played it, I literally went in there and removed the weapon art myself. It's so distracting and unnecessary. The new enemies were alright, but I don't like how many of them outright replaced classic enemies. There was an imbalance in enemy placement because of this. Also the random palswap Enforcers in the Dam are just awful. I don't know. I don't hate the mod, but I feel it's quite overrated. The levels are pretty but overall it's quite boring, most of the mod is spent moving from set-piece to set-piece, with very few or even no enemies because it wants you to see a scripted event or something. Funnily enough it spends so much time trying to recreate things from trailers that it ends up having most of the faults that the actual DNF has. I wouldn't dissuade anyone from playing it, but it doesn't fit the 3DR style at all really. I know this is a hot take and most people won't agree with me but whatever.

I don't disagree with anything you're saying here, yet I still stand by what I said, if that makes any sense.

[ck3D]

necroslut, on 19 October 2020 - 08:44 PM, said:

The way I remember it, I do see it as a sort of turning point with regards to moving away from "Build porn" (and I'm tempted to include stuff like Roch here). Build porn can be interesting in its own right, and knowing Build can be impressive to see how mappers push the limits, but it rarely works as a gameplay experience as opposed to a showcase of what can be done but maybe, if you're trying to make something of interest to people other than Build mappers, shouldn't.

True, I'd say that's a very accurate way of describing MM. I'd definitely throw Roch into Build porn category as that's what it was at the time but to be fair, a lot of Pascal's layouts (not talking the 3D aesthetics at all of course) did take at least some clues from the original game I feel like. It's not obvious, I guess because he had to tweak the tradition his own way for it to work with the more complicated construction/design, but in a few of the maps (specific bits of them, in fact, never a whole map) you'll get the subtle feel that something is working right and he did try to parallel some kind of level design philosophy. The first instance to come to mind is how you have to spend a while indoors in Roch 6 finding your way from one building to the next around most of the map before getting to get out, and then you reach that area with the overpass that's almost strong enough to qualify as a central theme (of course Freeway did it better). Now a traditional Duke map probably would have made the top of the overpass explorable with SOS tricks, can't remember whether Pascal implemented that, if not this example doubles up as one where he just stopped at the cosmetic.

Honestly I'm kind of torn on the Roch maps - the ones I like best are usually people's least favorites, from the earlier parts of the series. A lot of them feel like a mishmash of disconnected rooms, sometimes they do feel a bit more coherent than that, and sometimes they'll straight up have museum sections that work better as tech prowess demonstrations or proofs of concept than they do as playable areas. But in general you're right on the money.

Then again most art forms typically go through experimental phases where things start looking weird for a bit with people exploring around the possibilities of the medium, and then return back to tradition again, just stronger of the new learnings - then rinse and repeat. Roch, BobSP and all those maps came out during years where people were full-on experimenting with possible things to do in the engine that originally weren't in the base game, so the departures most likely were a direction of choice, it's just that nobody really had the hindsight at the time to analyze things like this.

necroslut, on 19 October 2020 - 08:44 PM, said:

I think the appeal of the "big city sandbox" goes well beyond just Duke 3D -- it's a core part of games like GTA, Saints Row etc... and, with it basically being a flat square area with a bunch of symmetrically spread out blocks, isn't that interesting there either...

That's a good point, regarding the interest of such areas, again I don't think they have no potential, it's just that a lot of them are planned terribly, I'd reckon most people going for the style are going to aim for 'settings first', and make their big city as a big city but not as a fun arena, so at this point it just falls under general poor design; there's zero reason a map should be (or feel) flat if you have skyscrapers in there (meaning amazing potential for vertical action that's especially convenient to implement in Duke with all the flexible variety in elevators, etc.), zero reason why the streets themselves should be flat, zero reason why you couldn't have big earthquakes changing the height of most everything at street level at a key moment of the gameplay, zero reason why the placement of seeming 'detail' like cars and street furniture should be ordinary when they might as well be moved around somewhere interesting to use as barricades, etc.

But then that ties in with everything else you said after regarding direction and levels of focus, which I think is very valid observations and indirectly good level design advice.

[MetHy]

I think the primary reason why the original game maps have so much space to run around is multiplayer.
Space wasn't a gameplay concern in the sense that they intended for the player to circlestrafe around enemies, I think most players back then (including devs) shot at enemies by using cover, and in most cases wouldn't circlestrafe to dodge Picgop and Lizard's hitscan. Circlestrafing has become more like an unintended side effect which has only become part of the definition of early to mid 90's FPS gameplay after the fact.

However space was a gameplay concern because the game was meant to be played up to 8 players both in DM and CO-OP. There is also some proof that devs would indeed test multiplayer between themselves. There was most likely a LAN setup between all the devs computer if only to share files to begin with.

Multiplayer is however not a concern in most usermaps, so no one designing his level is ever going to think "well these rooms obviously don't work for 2 players coop, let alone 4", because they don't test for it, don't care for it to begin with.

This multiplayer concern can also most likely explain most of the interconnected areas in levels; and again linearility has been more frequent in usermaps.

[ck3D]

I actually keep multiplayer in mind more than ever these days when drawing interconnections and shortcuts from level section to level section, buildings with multiple exits facing different orientations at different levels, secret places, general terrain design... etc. which is funny because I'm dead aware that in reality 90% of Duke players just go SP, but it's so ingrained in traditional Duke 3D level design to wire things that way I just feel like respecting that, despite the apparent current disconnection. I always found it rather funny how MP maps were always regarded as '100% gameplay-oriented' (also because of the lack of progressive storytelling yeah, I get it) when in reality, even though the physics of AI-controlled monsters and human players are different, a fundamentally good arena will always be a fundamentally good arena, then of course you can come up with your own mode-specific tweaks and disguises but I'm of the school of thought that a good level should be a good level in every possible mode, just like the originals had to be, otherwise it denotes of a certain bias from the author (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, just what it is, a derivation with all the positives and negatives that come with it).

In short, to this day, whenever I design a new area, I don't just think 'oh, this is going to be make for a great firefight set-up against this or that monster', I think 'oh, this is going to make for a cool arena altogether' be it for SP or MP (which - thinking about it - I also consider when it comes to stuff like item distribution), and maybe it's important to keep envisioning everything if one's idea is to not get carried too far away.

[Aleks]

I've never been a fan of straight-up DM maps that people made back in the day, as most of them played terribly in DM, because they were... too small or just an arena-like things. Most fun in DM I had indeed in original levels, but then again - not all of them worked equally good for it. I might be in the minority here, but I hated Stadium and LA Rumble in dukematch as pretty much every respawn point is in the same area - I was more into larger maps, probably Raw Meat, Bank Roll, Flood Zone, Red Light District, Hollywood Holocaust were perfect size (haven't played that much of E2 or E4 in multiplayer). Then again, some levels are clearly more single player oriented, despite having teleports and stuff (Toxic Dump is the first that comes to mind here, also The Abyss, Lunar Reactor or E4 stuff like Critical Mass or Derelict). What I'm getting at is, I don't think it's mandatory (or even always good) to have multiplayer in mind when designing an SP map (also scripted sequences etc. might get screwed in MP) - but interconnected areas are always a great thing.

And I'm quite shocked to see how Roch maps gameplay seems to be belittled a bit in here - of course, it's mostly design and detailing that comes to mind when thinking of them, but also in terms of good level design, sense of progression and gameplay value I prefer them much over original levels. Same goes for stuff I've played recently like Merlijn's series, Maarten's Woudrichem map or most of ck3D's projects - they all feel far superior to the original levels when I take the nostalgia glasses off.

[NNC]

Aleks, on 20 October 2020 - 06:46 AM, said:

I've never been a fan of straight-up DM maps that people made back in the day, as most of them played terribly in DM, because they were... too small or just an arena-like things. Most fun in DM I had indeed in original levels, but then again - not all of them worked equally good for it. I might be in the minority here, but I hated Stadium and LA Rumble in dukematch as pretty much every respawn point is in the same area - I was more into larger maps, probably Raw Meat, Bank Roll, Flood Zone, Red Light District, Hollywood Holocaust were perfect size (haven't played that much of E2 or E4 in multiplayer). Then again, some levels are clearly more single player oriented, despite having teleports and stuff (Toxic Dump is the first that comes to mind here, also The Abyss, Lunar Reactor or E4 stuff like Critical Mass or Derelict). What I'm getting at is, I don't think it's mandatory (or even always good) to have multiplayer in mind when designing an SP map (also scripted sequences etc. might get screwed in MP) - but interconnected areas are always a great thing.

And I'm quite shocked to see how Roch maps gameplay seems to be belittled a bit in here - of course, it's mostly design and detailing that comes to mind when thinking of them, but also in terms of good level design, sense of progression and gameplay value I prefer them much over original levels. Same goes for stuff I've played recently like Merlijn's series, Maarten's Woudrichem map or most of ck3D's projects - they all feel far superior to the original levels when I take the nostalgia glasses off.

The design aspect is subjective. You can favour modern maps to classic ones because you prefer their detailing, colouring, shading etc., but it's hard to deny that in classic maps the gameplay flowed brilliantly and you never had to crouch to move forward in sprite-heavy rooms, never had to suffer from ammo shortage even with CGS/pistolstart every level, never went blindly in total darkness for major parts, always thought where you were going, themes didn't overstay their welcome, switches weren't used as semi-keycards, keycards were (most of the time) separating different sub-topics of the levels or marked a sign of something special coming up, not just random points that drag the levels longer, monster placement wasn't random, hitscanners were used at different places to projectile shooters, walls didn't explode into your face and so on. Even with more detailing, these common errors shouldn't be necessary in levels. I'm not talking about any specific level or author, these are pretty common problems IMHO. And when people bash Nightmare Zone for its moderately mean puzzles, I think they kinda agree with me, it's just a commercial product, so it didn't get a carte blanche for doing gameplay annoyances.

[Outtagum]

Danukem, on 19 October 2020 - 11:02 AM, said:

Not only that, but his sprite is kind of short. His size is 42xrepeat, 36yrepeat. Whereas most enemies are 40 yrepeat. The way he runs around like a maniac and he's kind of short, I think of him as a stocky Tom Cruise. But in all media he's always portrayed as this super big tall guy. Go figure.