Pulling your hair out?

Spooge

<div class="IPBDescription">Don't re-invent the wheel</div>I've been trying to find some inspiration for my current mapping project and I stumbled across David Johnston's <a href="http://www.planethalflife.com/davej/" target="_blank">web site</a>.  He's written a really good article about easing the anxiety that mappers sometimes experience when trying to improve the visual quality in their maps.  I thought it was a good read so if you're taking a break from the daily "grind", check it out <a href="http://www.planethalflife.com/davej/detail_versus_design.htm" target="_blank">here.</a>

Relic25

Well, it is a good article (I read it a long time ago), even though I'm in disagreement with about 30% of it.  I think having the luxury of having made <i>the</i> most popular multiplayer map in history tends to give him more credibility than the article warrants.  Don't get me wrong, I like Dave, and his maps (love them or hate them) demonstrate the pinnacle of gameplay <i>for the mods for which they were designed</i>.  But Dave has omitted several key factors in his essay.  For example, when he discusses the "On a Rail" levels in the original HL game, he hasn't taken into consideration (or at least hasn't discussed) that the primary reason behind the occasional texture misalignment and imperfection is simply that Valve is a business and Half-Life was a commercial venture.  Time and budget constraints played huge roles in these imperfections.  I don't think that 'gameplay' and 'flow' took any higher priorities in development, but they do, by necessity, come first chronologically.  So often, by the time development reaches the actual mapping/texturing/testing phases, the time and budget is tailing off, and sometimes projects at this stage get the "good enough" stamp.

I also disagree completely that details do not contribute to atmosphere.  Perhaps he was just misusing the word, and this is a semantic argument.  While tiny brush details may not be <i>necessary</i> for good, fast-paced gameplay (ie: CS), a game like NS, where mood and atmosphere play such a critical role, even a map with the most smooth and fast connectivity and best "gameplay", as Dave puts it, will not be the same  enjoyable experience if it is featureless, bright, and lacking in those details.  NS is by nature, a slower-paced game, where players have more time to absorb their environment, rather than rushing around and dropping everyone with headshots.  In CS, every solid piece of a map feels more or less like an obstacle, so there is good reason to minimize brush details.  NS play shouldn't have this same feel.

In his article, he also doesn't make any distinction between brush detail and texture detail.  No, I wouldn't spend <i>my</i> time creating handles/etc. from brushes, but there is no reason whatsoever why details like this can't be <i>simulated</i> through good texture details.  You can pack in an unbelievable amount of visual detail into a very low-poly room through creative use of textures.

There is also a strong argument that mapping is an artistic endeavor, therefore whatever time a mapper decides to spend on tidying up details/alignment/whatever is time well spent.  However, I am sure he was really trying to direct his essay towards amateur mappers with aims of someday doing commercial work, so I won't belabor the 'art' issue.



<!--EDIT|Relic25|Feb. 06 2002,18:53-->

realityisdead

Relic, I read that article a while ago too. But what I think Dave was trying to convey was that minor little unecesary details such as door handles (not details as a whole) are totally non-contributing to atmosphere. You're right though, he should have been more specific about his use of the word "detail". I believe the kind of detail that makes NS levels so great looking (atmospheric lighting, creative texture use, etc...) is not the kind of detail he talks about in the article.

I, myself, am rather obsessed with detail. But, as you mentioned, I believe it can be done without total reliance on brushwork. (Especially when you have such an awesome selection of textures... <!--emo&:)--><img src="http://www.natural-selection.org/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo--> ) Lighting detail (again, like you mentioned) is also extremely important. It is always the lighting that tells me if it is a professional or amateur level. That's why I like ns_bast so much... from the looks of the lighting, I'd swear you were a professional designer.

Overall, I think that what dave was trying to convey was that just because your level isn't detailed down to the bolts on a pipe, and their corresponding washers, it doesn't make it a <i>bad</i> level.

Not that detail as a whole does not matter in level design.

devilblocks

I read it and its got some good points but I think I'm going to strongly differ on the subject of detail and thus atmosphere - espicially for SP maps (and then also which extends to MP mods which really thrive on atmosphere).

Take this analogy.  If you look at a "masterpiece" painting that is part of the realism / Neoclassical movement, at a glance, they look absolutely amazing.  Consciously, you will not immediately pick up on the way the artist has spent a long time making sure the smallest folds in the fabric are equisite, or how the fingers are painstakenly drawn, or how things in the background receive enourmous amounts of time and so forth.  However, if the artist did not spend such efforts, you might not be able to put your finger on it right away, but the painting will "feel" off.  Sure it may still look good, but it won't convince you as much as one superbly detailed.

Thus, if we apply this to mapping, extraordinary efforts to atmosphere will have a stronger suspension of disbelief and draw the player in much more.  This doesn't of course mean load up on thousands of polys, but encompasses everything from brushes, to layout, to textures, to sound ambience, sprites, entities and so forth.

realityisdead

Well put devilblocks. I agree that the key to overwhelming the player with a sense of detail is by utilizing all forms of sense... visual, audio, etc. Things that, individually, one won't notice right away, but standing in a room and being presented with all these at once, gives them the feeling that this is just <i>right</i>. <!--emo&:)--><img src="http://www.natural-selection.org/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo-->

devilblocks

Thats basically how I map.  I keep working on a room or section until I can run inside of it and say "This feels right".  Alot of times when I fire up the room, I know it looks decent, or even is starting to look good, but I just get that feeling of "something is off".  I get that alot too when I look / run around other peoples maps too.  If I *really* think about it I can usually find something that could be better, and alot of times its a change in lighting somewhere, or even something as simple as putting an ambient sound in that makes the place come alive.