[Forge]

Sanek, on 16 March 2016 - 08:00 AM, said:

After all these posts, I don't even know if making another map is a good idea for me.

why?
is it because you don't enjoy making maps, or is it because you aren't getting the recognition you think you deserve?

[Sanek]

Forge, on 16 March 2016 - 10:05 AM, said:

why?
is it because you don't enjoy making maps, or is it because you aren't getting the recognition you think you deserve?

No, I'm still enjoying making maps, but I have a couple of reasons for that.

1.I have a lot of ideas, but the results is not satisfying. I started another outdoor canyon map last weekend, but I don't know if I would continue it. Sure, I can built a lot of thing here, but I'm afraid that I can't handle the lighting, feel myself dissapointed and rush the map for release. DoomBOX is not the matter this time, actually - I really have a lot of fun while making it.

2. I'm not that good. I made a 1 or 2 good maps, but that's it. I try to come up with solid design and original ideas, but the maps turns out anything but solid and original. People will remeber Red series, or Roch series for decades to come, but I doubt that anyone will remember maps by Sanek.

3. Recognition is completely another matter. I don't think that I'm not getting the recognition. I made a couple of good maps, and the simple fact that community recognise me as mapper, as one of gang, is satisfy me enough. You might remember what relations we have back in the old days.

I know that as a mapper, I rarely raise above average. The ratings and forum replies shows it. In some ways, it makes me to work more on my mapping skills, try to become better next time, but since my maps still don't get better (I'll say that they get up-and-down) I'm not sure how people will appreciate my next work.

I still want to make maps, and I think I try do that canyon map and another bizzare map I thought about, but ever since Bridge when I started another map I thought that it mght be my last.

Damn, this theard gets really depressing.

[Forge]

so you enjoy making the maps themselves, and you have plenty of ideas

-but-

Sanek, on 16 March 2016 - 11:34 AM, said:

the simple fact that community recognise me as mapper, as one of gang, is satisfy me enough.

I'm not sure how people will appreciate my next work.

People will remeber Red series, or Roch series for decades to come, but I doubt that anyone will remember maps by Sanek.

you do it because you want people to give your work the same acclaim as Roch or Red maps. - You want to be 'remembered' for your maps a decade from now.
-yet you have difficulty discerning the difference between personal criticism and constructive criticism
-and you fail to take the constructive criticism and use it to improve your maps
-and you don't feel like, or even make any attempt, to do things with your maps that will improve them - e.g. proper wall & sector shading, the extra work to give ALL areas good sector work, detailing, and trimming

you're making maps for the wrong reason, and you're expecting excessive accolades for maps that you won't put in the necessary work to give attention to areas that are lacking.

Most mappers listen to constructive criticism and attempt to make improvements - trying to implement the things they're weak at. They keep plugging away at it until they learn the skills necessary to make a completely sound and solid level. You have consistently ignored everyone's advice, so you still stink at things like proper shading. With as many maps as you have put out the good mappers that get the accolades you seek would have mastered the skills you keep putting off and ignoring by now. Because of it you're still almost at square one with certain things that make an excellent map excellent. It seems your strategy is not to put out a few good maps with a lot of work and attention, but to try to take a short-cut and flood the market with mediocre maps and hope that you finally catch the big fish. Quantity over quality won't cut it if you want to have your work compared to Red or Roch.

[Sanek]

Forge, on 16 March 2016 - 12:28 PM, said:

you do it because you want people to give your work the same acclaim as Roch or Red maps.

No. I don't even think I will get the same acclaim. I have a couple of high-rated maps and that's all about it.

Forge, on 16 March 2016 - 12:28 PM, said:

you're making maps for the wrong reason, and you're expecting excessive accolades for maps that you won't put in the necessary work to give attention to areas that are lacking.

I don't get it. As I said before, I don't though of my maps as a masterpieces. Even before DoomBOX was released, I knew that it's not the best example of my work, but at least I tried to come up with something good. If I will make maps only trying to beat the classic, I will quit this thing a long time ago. I

Forge, on 16 March 2016 - 12:28 PM, said:

-and you fail to take the constructive criticism and use it to improve your maps

I don't think so. People ofthen say that I rush my releases, so for the last maps of mine I try to spend more time on polishing. I hope I get better next time.

Forge, on 16 March 2016 - 12:28 PM, said:

-and you don't feel like, or even make any attempt, to do things with your maps that will improve them - e.g. proper wall & sector shading, the extra work to give ALL areas good sector work, detailing, and trimming

You said it like I intentionally trying to make my maps worse. Or my skills is not improving over the last few years?

Forge, on 16 March 2016 - 12:28 PM, said:

It seems your strategy is not to put out a few good maps with a lot of work and attention, but to try to take a short-cut and flood the market with mediocre maps and hope that you finally catch the big fish. Quantity over quality won't cut it if you want to have your work compared to Red or Roch.

WAT? If you keep the track of my releases, you will notice the I don't release that much.


I really feel myself confused right now. You said all these thing like I'm the worst mapper possible around here.

[Forge]

and you say things like: the simple fact that community recognise me as mapper, as one of gang, is satisfy me enough.
in almost the same breath you say: People will remeber Red series, or Roch series for decades to come, but I doubt that anyone will remember maps by Sanek.

Your mouth says no, but you eyes say yes. It implies that you are worried about getting recognition and being remembered.

Have your skills gotten better? Yes, In the areas you were good at early on.
On the other hand your skills in most of the areas that you were bad at early on still haven't improved because you've made no effort to improve them.

On average you make good maps that are enjoyable to play - it's just that you're lacking the patience or motivation to put in the extra work to make them excellent.

btw, I have news for you - there are A LOT of people who've made several excellent maps, but you'll never ever hear their name or their maps mentioned in the same sentence as Roch or Red.

[Forge]

The Chronic episode (with Zykov Eddy in the first level)
Wonderful Summer Time
Countdown To Christmas episode
Cafe
1999Russia
Haunted House
Early To Bed
On Vacation episode
Wide Open Spaces
Dayz of our lives
LORCH: Abducted (with Merlijn)
LORCH2
Bridge Between Two Islands
LORCH 3 (leaked)
Return to Taygeta
Cold in November
Personal Storm
DoomBox

Hell Awaits
Red 1 (The long road)
Red 2
Red 3
Red 4
Red 5
Red1: Poisoned lands
Red2: Alien occupation

Count (minus community projects):
18 for Sanek
8 for Merlijn (you can add a few more if you want to include misc. maps from projects like Imperium, etc.)

Twice as many as Merlijn who's been at it a lot longer


quantity over quality

you can take what i'm saying personally, but I'm not trying to put you down and tell you that you're a bad person - I'm trying to shake you by your shoulders and wake you up from whatever funk you seem to have gotten yourself in because you're taking constructive criticism personally - and you shouldn't. You should actually take it as a positive thing that people believe you have the potential to make excellent maps with a little extra effort.

[zykov eddy]

The main problem here is the lack of focus and your desire to rush the release. One look at any area of DoomBOX and you can tell that it's not as good as Red or other highly acclaimed maps. Making DoomBOX look as good as Red would take years because of the size of it! I say, stick to the smaller levels instead, where it's easier to add details. If you don't enjoy adding details to your levels, ask someone else to help you with it, to join your team. Sanek, you are at your best when you work with someone - after all, LORCH was an amazing release, thanks to the teamwork.

Just put more time and effort into your work, that's all. You are capable of making great maps, and BBTI is a great example. No need to hurry, take your time with your maps.

[Merlijn]

Since Roch and Red were brought up:

if you play the first 4 maps of both series you'll notice how the design evolves from pretty basic/meh to very complex and refined throughout those 4 maps.
I think that's what you can learn from those series. Refining a map takes time and patience, but it's worth it!

Also, you still seem to underestimate the importance of wall shading.
We're not talking about complex sector based shading here, it's about creating depth by using different shading values on an object.
It's extremely easy to implement and drastically improves the visual appeal of an area.

I still think Doombox is a fun map to play btw. It's not a bad map by any means.


IMO the 2 most important elements in mapping (and other art forms) are concept and execution.
Some of your older levels were executed well enough but weren't very interesting on a conceptual level.
Doombox does have a cool concept behind it, but the execution is lacking (as explained in previous comments).
Bridge between 2 Islands did well on both accounts, that's why it has a higher rating.

[Jblade]

Take it from me - don't worry about recognition. I've put out a bunch of TCs and made dozens of maps and I'm never ever mentioned in any conversation about mapping style or stuff like that - it's not something you can really force and I understand that seeking recognition is a good driving factor but overcoming the hurdle of expecting tons of praise or feedback for releases is an important one. Forge's advice is solid gold so hopefully you'll pull through this rut.

[Micky C]

Yeah the AMC TC Episode 2 received next to no reaction on release despite all the work that went into its massive 12 hour campaign (longer than most commercial FPS). But it's just so gosh damn fun to work on that we've kept chugging away at Episode 3 such that it's now roughly half finished, despite that it'll probably get 2 replies in the release thread. There's even a smidge of stuff done for Episode 4.

I totally agree with Merlijn and Eddy btw. You'd be very surprised how much more depth some simple wall shading (giving adjacent walls different shade values to make them stand out) can give a level. Also that if you can't fill an area with details, certainly consider making the area smaller so that you don't need to put in as many details. Although I understand that the shear size of this map was one of its primary features, which makes it a tough call.

[brullov]

[PsychoGoatee]

The map has some pretty cool stuff, and I'd say if making such a huge map you'd rather not do shading, I think that's ok. Just getting more maps out there is good for the community.

So some feedback, I think it'd be good to leave a few more jetpacks lying around. And also more firepower, I found lots of pistol clips but no pistol, and the couple Enforcers I faced didn't drop any chainguns. Was fun starting with the freezethrower though.

Another thing is you don't want any areas to be game-ending. I got stuck down here for example, since I had run out of jetpack fuel and was going around the map to see what the red button I pushed did. If there was a shorter sprite or box so you could jump up onto a cactus you'd be able to get out, which would be a cool thing. I did keep an eye on the fuel as you mentioned, but it was either not use it or use it, still were plenty of ledges I hadn't explored yet I think.

Also if you want more eyes on your map and more feedback, I'd recommend releasing it on steam as well. Comments really add up over there.

Attached thumbnail(s)

• 

[Robman]

I'm so glad I'm not a Duke mapper... (It's a flooded market in the build world)
The bar is set mighty high.

[Mister Sinister]

Quote

Another thing is you don't want any areas to be game-ending. I got stuck down here for example, since I had run out of jetpack fuel and was going around the map to see what the red button I pushed did.

I'd say there is no point in that. Considering that jetpack fuel can ran out at any moment if you're not paying attention that would mean there must be a jetpack lying around in every corner.

[PsychoGoatee]

Mister Sinister, on 16 March 2016 - 05:45 PM, said:

I'd say there is no point in that. Considering that jetpack fuel can ran out at any moment if you're not paying attention that would mean there must be a jetpack lying around in every corner.

Did you read the bit about how adding a little sprite would make it so you can hop out of that hole? Since you'd be able to jump on the cactus. You wouldn't need a jetpack there to get out, but in general in Duke level design it's good to not be able to get stuck easily like that. This is also a part of the map you can get to before you even get a jetpack.

[Hank]

Sanek, on 16 March 2016 - 08:00 AM, said:

After all these posts, I don't even know if making another map is a good idea for me.

Since the dawn of mapping, the duke crowd is known to be one of the toughest.
It will all depend on your goals. If one of the goal is to excel to new heights, keep on going until you hit the jack pot.

[Sanek]

zykov eddy, on 16 March 2016 - 02:14 PM, said:

If you don't enjoy adding details to your levels, ask someone else to help you with it, to join your team. Sanek, you are at your best when you work with someone - after all, LORCH was an amazing release, thanks to the teamwork.

I offered a lot of teamwork to another mappers, but people rarely want to work with me (except Merlijn ). Also, if I release a map with somebody else, I don't feel like I achieved the result.

PsychoGoatee, on 16 March 2016 - 05:07 PM, said:

Another thing is you don't want any areas to be game-ending. I got stuck down here for example, since I had run out of jetpack fuel and was going around the map to see what the red button I pushed did. If there was a shorter sprite or box so you could jump up onto a cactus you'd be able to get out, which would be a cool thing. I did keep an eye on the fuel as you mentioned, but it was either not use it or use it, still were plenty of ledges I hadn't explored yet I think.

Yes, there are a couple of places where you can't get out if you don't have the jetpack, but every big area have an easily accessible place where you can get yourself a new jetpack.


@Eddy, Merlijn, James and Micky C - thank you for your replies. I really feel better now, and certainly try to learn from my mistakes. And improve.

[ToiletDuck64]

Sanek, on 17 March 2016 - 04:08 AM, said:

there are a couple of places where you can't get out if you don't have the jetpack

I had issues getting places as well; I think the problem is that most of the places where jetpacks are available require jetpacks to get to the jetpacks.
I have a habit of putting jetpacks at the bottom of "bottomless" pits in "non-jetpack" levels to prevent exactly this type of problem (i.e. to prevent players from being stuck with no way to get out except death or whatever).
Also, in one of the later areas of the level...

Spoiler

In the area in the north with the really deep pit and the blimps, flying out of the pit takes a lot of jetpack fuel. It might be better to set up a non-jetpack way to get out of a pit that deep, even in a level like yours that has lots of jetpacks.

(I think that the jetpack-focused-ness of the level seems to make these issues worse than they theoretically should be; this is probably why jetpack-focused levels are rare.)

By the way, I agree with the statements that this map has too many enemies RESPAWN-ing in when you do stuff; I think there are too many, even for a map of this size.

[Kyanos]

I used to not like Mikko, but if he makes Sanek quit mapping I'll review my dislike of him.

Jk. Sanek, map for fun, if you still like it.

[ck3D]

since Siebenpolis was brought up I thought I'd chime in too : that map of mine earned the exact same MSDN rating as yours, and to be fair I even feel like the only reason Mikko rated it over 85 when it really wasn't his cup of tea at all was so that it would still qualify as a 'hot map' on his site, a nice gesture if anything. Personally never had a problem with that rating despite that map being one of my favorites I've made due to 1) the awareness that everyone has their own tastes and everyone's experience with the same map is bound to be different (and reviews are subjective), 2) it's impossible to make a map that will please just about everyone so you really should just make maps for yourself and occasionally make them public for those who might enjoy them (it shouldn't matter if others won't, to each their own) 3) last but not least 86 is actually a pretty fucking good score, that's a 8,6 / 10 or a 17,2 / 20 FFS.

I don't have much time right now so I'll be quick (I just deleted a large fraction of my post just so I could go straight to the point), what people are basically giving you shit for (but really trying to encourage you to solve) is your absence of a "Sanek style", basically you keep releasing maps (although not that numerous) that always have the same very basic flaws to them (shading etc...) and never much of original substance - you either go and try to mimic certain standards of style (sometimes it's Eddy's esoteric / dreamlike maps, sometimes it's the more detailed maps etc.), but you rarely bring anything truly new to the table, or whenever you try to stay away from obvious influences as to trying to make a 'pure' Sanek level (which I encourage you to keep trying), the resulting maps often turn out feel a bit bare & bland (notably in terms of gameplay), like a beginnerish level.

I personally don't have a problem with that and even think this lack of style (occasionally disguised with obvious experimentation) kind of makes for a certain Sanek style. lots of people would like to see you step out of your shell a bit and become more ambitious and original (not 'ambitious and original' for the sake of being 'ambitious and original', though - just map with careful sincerity and good things will ensue), but I personally don't mind. I liked Cold in November and some of your other maps, haven't really played this new one (could only find the time to look at it in the editor) but I might like it too, just like some others didn't like the same maps I did like and might like others. live and let live, you know. Mikko's really just trying to ruffle your feathers a bit because he wants to see you to try harder (ie. he didn't have a problem rating Bridge Between Two Islands 93 - that map looked more ambitious and had a bit more substance to it), which kind of sucks if you're not in the mood or have no time for that since he's a key reviewer at a time in Duke mapping where visibility is key (key to nothing at all anymore, to be honest - 2004 is long gone) but whatever, let it ride you know. your maps keep getting high scores too, it's not like he gave you a 45 or something and even then it's just a website, others will like your map regardless of how much he did, he did take the time to give it some exposure and the screenshots do just as much of the talking as the text, too...

don't worry and keep mapping !

[Mark]

Micky C, on 16 March 2016 - 03:57 PM, said:

Yeah the AMC TC Episode 2 received next to no reaction on release despite all the work that went into its massive 12 hour campaign (longer than most commercial FPS). But it's just so gosh damn fun to work on that we've kept chugging away at Episode 3 such that it's now roughly half finished, despite that it'll probably get 2 replies in the release thread. There's even a smidge of stuff done for Episode 4.

I remember how disappointed I was after releasing my Graveyard mod. I thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread but it evidently wasn't. I moved on to Decay with a more "mature" expectation. It didn't live up to the decade long hype but a lot of the lukewarm responses bothered me less this second time around. After spending many 100's of hours on these 2 projects I realized the praise is good but I just love the creation of the maps, models, sounds, textures. So much that I'm still doing all that for a bunch of other projects. One of them is bound to hit the jackpot.

P.S. At least you were lucky enough to have your stuff reviewed.

[zykov eddy]

Mark., on 27 March 2016 - 10:13 AM, said:

P.S. At least you were lucky enough to have your stuff reviewed.

Decay and Graveyard weren't reviewed?

[Forge]

zykov eddy, on 27 March 2016 - 10:40 AM, said:

Decay and Graveyard weren't reviewed?

I haven't scoured MSDN to see, but probably not - Mikko doesn't play maps that require polymer very often. - something about his video card not being able to handle it (but that was a few years ago).