[Mark]

I watched some of the videos on your webpage. It makes me want to go out and buy HL2 just so I can play your maps.

[SPYmaps]

Thanks Marked, buying Hl2 (and the episodes 1 and 2) is a really good choice when you like fps games.
Because the games are great, and, there are thousands and thousand of great SP and mp mods made for it
by many people. Also will the game be quit cheep now i assume, so, you really should consider buying it.

greetings,
Leon

[icecoldduke]

The problem with using EDuke32 for a indie type game is you probably eventually stop doing it, not because you lack skill, but because all guys starting out want that visual appeal of current gen tech. I am not a big of UDK, but for guys just starting out it is probably the best place to start right now, or Unity. EDuke32 is great if you want to make duke mods, or something like the bloodtc where you have to have the vintage feel to make it work, but not many people will play a brand new game that uses the eduke32 engine.

World Craft or whatever the half life tools are called now, aren't very friendly or streamlined. HL2 still looks alright, but if you want to make a indie game you can distribute to all your friends and say "look what i can do", HL2 isn't really a good option until Valve gets around to their engine tech again.

I'm not hating on eduke32, or hl2 it's just a lot of us have been were you are at, and had this romantic view of what we can do in whatever engine, but if you are serious about making something you need to consider realistically why you are choosing that tool over the tool that will more than likely get you to succeed in your goals.

[SPYmaps]

Thanks Icecoldduke, for your input.
And you are right in almost everything you say, although i do wonder if you are right with;
"...not many people will play a brand new game that uses the eduke32 engine."
it is true, the eduke32 doesn't look good any more, compared with all those other engines that are out there now.
I do realise this very well, but for a "small" indie fps game i still do think the Eduke32 could deliver quit well, at least i hope it will.

My main reason to choose for this engine is that i am a mapper that can also draw and paint quit well. And with those skills i can make
a indie game with the eduke32. For all those other engines i first need to learn modeling, rigging, animating, etc. And it is not realistic to
think that i can learn all those skills well in a rather short time. And even when i could it would mean that it takes a lot of extra work, time and effort
to realise everything that i need for the game. Ofcourse could i look for help, team members that can model and do all those other things well.
But i have quit a lot of experience of working with team members in this field, (have been modding now for over 12 years and have released many
sp-mods).

I am still working on my final sp-mod and hopefully i will be able to release this one at the end of this year, after having worked on it for 3 years.
So, i still have some time before i need to make a final decision on what engine i will use.

thanks,

Leon

[icecoldduke]

First off why do you want to make a FPS game? You do realize some of the most successful games are stupid little small games like farmville? You can knock out a simple 3d top down raptor type game in UDK without any skeletal assets.

Quote

it is true, the eduke32 doesn't look good any more, compared with all those other engines that are out there now.
I do realise this very well, but for a "small" indie fps game i still do think the Eduke32 could deliver quit well, at least i hope it will.

EDuke32 is a vintage style fps engine, with some current gen tech that if you wanted to utlize you should def just go with UDK or Unity or something more mainstream. The software renderer aka the vintage style renderer, isn't that appealing to 90% of the gaming community, mostly because of the dull color scheme.

I'm not trying to get you to go with whatever engine over eduke32, I could personally care less what you do, I'm just trying to get you to think about what your doing. At the end of the day if you want to make a vintage style fps shooter than go for it, but you should start thinking now of new mechanics you can make that will make the game fun to play, and in order to do that you will need to master the con system and maybe some of the engine side stuff.

Build is a great editor, and if your just getting starting doing level design its great starting editor, but you can easily do more in UDK just by watching damn youtube tutorials.

Take your game idea and imagine it with just boxes and squares and figure out if your game is fun with boxes and squares. If it's not
you should reconsider doing a vintage style fps, but at the end of the day its your choice.

[Mark]

I took another look on your web page of screenshots from your maps in different games. Most of what I saw there can be done with Eduke providing you have the custom texture and model resources. I had 4 pics of different indoor and outdoor styles of maps I've made to include in this post but I decided to narrow it down to just one. I'm not the most talented mapper around but but I think this looks just about as good as other game engines. This is using just the resources contained in DukePlus. The pic looses a little clarity from compression but still makes my point.

Attached thumbnail(s)

• 

[SPYmaps]

Thanks for commenting again Icecoldduke, but a lot of what you say and ask i already have answered several times in previous comments
of mine. Please don't see this as a negative answer of mine because i do realise that you can't read everything that is already said in this topic.
But i can't keep writing down the same answers every time.

And Marked, nice screenshot you have there. And you are right, with the right custom textures and models a map could look quit good even in
Eduke32. And i think that this is were my strength is, because when i may say so myself, i am a very talented drawer painter. And with that
it will be quit easy to still come up with nice looking levels. But, i just need to do some testing as soon as i am done with this final mod of mine.

About my website i do need to say that i really need to update that one, because what is shown there is by far not the best stuff i created over
the last 12 years. My youtube site does show a better picture of that, should you be interested in that then please check here;

http://www.youtube.c...c.1.QSnZAFDaswE
(am not sure how to show the link to my page, so i just searched for SPYmaps videos on youtube and give you that link here)

And i said it before, but will say it again. I first do need to release my 5th Hl2 (ep2) sp-mod and when that is done i finally can start working on
this, ofcourse i will keep updating this topic then and show what i am trying to do with Eduke32.

[t800]

You gave us wrong link. It directs me to my own page of uploaded YouTube videos.

[SPYmaps]

I'm sorry, my mistake.
i will see if i can replace the link above with the right one,
here is the right link to;

http://www.youtube.c...s/videos?view=0


leon

[Lunick]

http://www.youtube.c...s/videos?view=0 this what you need?

[icecoldduke]

These kind of maps can be a good thing for a indie game cause people will play it because there mind will fill in the blanks. The problem is you can't just create rooms anyone that don't represent anything, and a lot of people that use build fall into that trap.

[SPYmaps]

Thanks Lunick, for the right link. Don't know why, but i couldn't find that link for my page, have changed the fist link i gave now also in to this right one.

And i know exactly what you mean Icecoldduke, and you are so right. We all know those empty looking rooms and hallways, that just seem to be there
to link one part of a level with another one. People forget that each meter of a map has to be appealing, and not just a transition.

Maybe i may show you some gameplay footage of my 15th map of the new sp-mod i am making (with HL2 ep2), i just finished this level yesterday after
6 weeks of daily hard work. It is a good example of how i map and leveldesign. Its a 10 min. video that shows about 60% of this new level, (i am known
for my large maps, lol)

(ihave mapped with Build/duke 3d in 1999 and 2000, said to say i lost all those map over the years.)



greetings,
Leon

[The Commander]

That HL2 mod looks pretty cool.
I assume you are changing the weapon models etc as I do not agree with the sound the SMG is making, sounds like something a pulse rifle would make.

[Diaz]

The biggest quirk EDuke32 has for outdoor scenes compared to HL2 is the lack of something like the light_environment entity. EDuke32 is more like the Doom 3 engine when it comes to lighting.
It lacks HDR rendering, too. You can make it look like Doom 3 on steroids, with higher res textures, and that's pretty much it. With the right assets it could be very, very nice, but of course it's not up to the latest tech. I think it could be great for a night-time scenario with small to medium sized areas.

The great thing about EDuke32 for level design is the ease of use of Mapster32. It really blows everything else out of the water. Making complex architecture is not that easy, but you could use models for that, as modern games do.

Your HL2 maps look very nice. Your skills as a drawer/painter really show.

[Mikko]

Diaz, on 28 October 2012 - 01:55 PM, said:

The great thing about EDuke32 for level design is the ease of use of Mapster32. It really blows everything else out of the water.

This is a rather common fallacy. Build/Mapster32 is very rudimentary and a pain in the butt to use compared to most post-Quake editors.

[Diaz]

Mikko_Sandt, on 28 October 2012 - 02:09 PM, said:

This is a rather common fallacy. Build/Mapster32 is very rudimentary and a pain in the butt to use compared to most post-Quake editors.

Having used all of them, I disagree. It could be that I have used Build for a very, very long time now, but I think it's quicker to make stuff with it, at least now that we can use point and spot lights and don't have to make all the shading by hand.

[Mblackwell]

I agree with Diaz. I've used UnrealEd, QuArk, Hammer, and idTech4's editor, and they are all fairly slow going for simple things. They are great for small details, but there's ways of speeding that up in BUILD as well. The difference (at least in UnrealEd and idTech4/Doom3) is that you can blend together simple shapes/blocks into a complex form (say a rocky wall, a rough terrain, etc), and then highlight the whole thing and export it as a mesh that you can reuse later. It still takes a long time to set up however. In fact I'd say that idTech4 was probably the closest thing to BUILD as far as speed, and while not as quick to use you had the additional flexibility of patches - seamless planes that could be bent and flexed into any variety of curved shapes. Things like smooth hills or vaulted church ceilings were easy to set up because of this.

BUILD's biggest failing is that everything is down to keyboard shortcuts which must be memorized, however that's also one of the things that allows it to be so darned quick to use.

[Jimmy]

I remember trying to use Hammer and feeling like a retard.
I mean, I am a retard, but you get my point.

[Diaz]

The curved surfaces (patches) on Q3 were indeed an awesome tool. I have no idea why they removed them for the D3 engine (they did, or am I not remembering correctly?).

[Mblackwell]

No, patches were in D3. One gentleman (not me!) even managed a version of Reims Cathedral:

[Diaz]

Oh yeah. Now that you mention it, I think I remember making handrails with patches in D3...

[Micky C]

Big whoop, those arches are possible in eduke32 no worries. TROR makes it a lot more viable as you can do what you want on the church floor without worrying about messing up the slopes on the roof.

[SPYmaps]

Thank you all for commenting again, and for the positive comments on the movie i showed of my latest sp-mod.

I think it just isn't fair to compare Build with other/newer engines and editors.
Over the last decade i have mapped for at least a year or longer with all kind of different editors and they all have
there strong and weak points, same counts for the Hammer (Hl2 editor). I have been mapping now with Hammer
for about 7 years or so, and to me it feels like breathing air or something like that, that is why i can use it also
as quick as i did before with the Build editor.
It all comes down i guess to how experienced you are with a editor, when you use it for 6 to 10 hours a day, for
a few years then every editor will be easy to use.

Ofcourse would i LOVE to make a indie fps with the latest Cryengine, the UDK, Unity or even Blender for that
matter, was it not that i then would need a lot of team members to realise the game. To think i could do all things
myself (modeling, animations, rigging, etc etc etc)) is simply not realistic, qua time and effort, and qua learning
all skills. I am for most a mapper that can make nice textures if needed. And with Build i really do think i can
do everything myself, with a little bit of help and advice on some issues.

That is why i still do think that Build is the best engine and editor for me, for this next indie project of mine.
But i do say it again, i would LOVE to use another/ better engine/editor for it.

Thanks for all your input!

Leon

(should you be interested in more movies, screens etc of this new mod then please check my modd site
for, there you find loads of other movies and screens, etc;)
http://www.moddb.com...e-3-the-closure

[Loke]

Captain Awesome, on 28 October 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

I remember trying to use Hammer and feeling like a retard.
I mean, I am a retard, but you get my point.

Pff, Hammer is one of the easiest map editors out there. The only frustrating and time-consuming thing is when you have to construct shapes such as mountains or cliffs with the vertex tool (talking Half-Life 1 here!). Such stuff is so much easier to pop up in BUILD/Mapster32.

[Diaz]

Micky C, on 29 October 2012 - 03:21 AM, said:

Big whoop, those arches are possible in eduke32 no worries. TROR makes it a lot more viable as you can do what you want on the church floor without worrying about messing up the slopes on the roof.

Yeah. Churches are always a great map to make; the result is usually quite impressive and they are very easy to make, as it's mostly copy & paste. With EDuke32 I'd be worried about the number of lights needed to make it look good, though. Plus the resulting architecture is quite complex and lights would make it unplayable. You'd need to play a lot with normal mapping to make the architecture as simple as possible. That, or use models for things like the upper columns and the arches. Models are much quicker to render.

The good thing about Q3's patches was the shading. It looked very smooth and nice. Plus, there was LOD code that would change the number of segments the curves were made of on the fly.

[Mblackwell]

Also to make the arches you simply took the patch arch you simply selected a vertex and moved it and it would create a smooth curvature. If patches were lined up together they would all line up and light seamlessly.

Diaz: For the church in D3 I know he cheated. I remember talking to the guy that made it and he used blended textures for the light through the windows along with some simple volume lights. The biggest issue in BUILD/EDuke32 would be getting the arches correct.

[Mikko]

Diaz, on 28 October 2012 - 02:14 PM, said:

Having used all of them, I disagree. It could be that I have used Build for a very, very long time now, but I think it's quicker to make stuff with it, at least now that we can use point and spot lights and don't have to make all the shading by hand.

There are so many things that are way, way backwards in Build such as handling sloped surfaces, copying/pasteing sectors or moving around larger selections with complex spritework (which is very quick & easy in Worldcraft/Hammer), textures often seem to have a life of their own, building fake ROR stuff with sprites is a pain in the butt (although it's considerable easier in Mapster32 but still light years away from other editors), and, most of all, the old DOS-type interface is terrible (you need to memorize keys, there's only one grid view mode, etc.).

[Mblackwell]

There's actually more than one grid view mode, just not all at once.

[Mikko]

But the slightly tilted top-down perspective is hardly useful for anything but TROR editing.

[Diaz]

There might be many drawbacks, but the thing is that you shouldn't try to make things as complex with Build as what you would do with other editors, at least in terms of architecture. For less complex things, Mapster is much quicker. And most of the time you won't be doing very complex architecture with any editor; such complex details are done with models, and those can be handled well in Mapster too. They don't work as well as in UDK, but they are just as easy to handle, which is the point here.

Have you played Gears of War? The third level, "house of the sovereigns", could be easily replicated in Mapster if you rip the models, probably just as quick as you would do with UnrealEd. It wouldn't look as good of course, but you get my point.

In fact I like that last idea, lol. I might make a small test map.