Custom Map Server Admins:

taledentaleden Join Date: 2003-04-06 Member: 15252Members, Constellation
in Mapping Forum
<div class="IPBDescription">a question</div> I'm about 60-65% through development of my map, and I've already hit the 4mb texture limit. I've optimized everything I can without sacrificing the visuals, but I'm still at about 4.3mb, with a fair bit left to build.

My question is directed at admins of servers that run custom maps, and it is this: if my map is overwise decent, can I expect it to get any play time on custom servers if it is over the 4mb limit? I figure, if Flayra expresses interest in making my map official, then I can go back and get it under the texture limit, but since I'm not counting on that happening, I'd rather just build it so it looks nice and release it as a custom map. If, on the other hand, custom server admins won't run a map that's over the limit, then I may as well built it toward that limit now, rather than going back later.

What are everybody's thoughts on this?
Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome

Comments

  • XythXyth Avatar Join Date: 2003-11-04 Member: 22312Members
    Umm, I don't think it's really a matter of "will people play it if it is or not" it's more of a matter of "The compiler wont (compile) the map if it is to high..."
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • taledentaleden Join Date: 2003-04-06 Member: 15252Members, Constellation
    Cagey's tools have an option to increase the texture limit - I upped mine to 8mb, and it is compiling presently.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • MendaspMendasp I touch maps in inappropriate places Valencia, Spain Join Date: 2002-07-05 Member: 884Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow, Retired Community Developer
    That limit is there for the lower-end users (we're talking about 8-16 mbs gfx cards), since they have to preload the models, map, textures... etc. The performance impact is client-side, the server admins won't even notice.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • NEO_PhyteNEO_Phyte We need shirtgons&#33; Join Date: 2003-12-16 Member: 24453Members, Constellation
    <!--QuoteBegin-Mendasp+Jun 15 2004, 02:20 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mendasp @ Jun 15 2004, 02:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> That limit is there for the lower-end users (we're talking about 8-16 mbs gfx cards), since they have to preload the models, map, textures... etc. The performance impact is client-side, the server admins won't even notice. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    ...unless they are running on low-end systems
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • taledentaleden Join Date: 2003-04-06 Member: 15252Members, Constellation
    ...and unless they, on a matter of principle, don't want to host maps that will cause their players to lag and go to another server. I can think of any number of reasons why a custom map server admin would shy away from maps that are resource-heavy, just like they shied away from Hera and Bast back in the day. My question is, will being over the texture limit prompt any server admins here to not host my map?
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • CabooseCaboose title = name(self, handle) Join Date: 2003-02-15 Member: 13597Members, Constellation
    I do beleive that a majority of people have at least 32mb gfx cards and can handle maps like that... Just don't go over 8 megs...
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • MendaspMendasp I touch maps in inappropriate places Valencia, Spain Join Date: 2002-07-05 Member: 884Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow, Retired Community Developer
    Woops, with "the server admins won't even notice" I meant that the server performance was going to be the same...

    If they took out Hera and Bast was because they had a lot of entities, and that increased the CPU usage...

    For using 4.3 mbs you're not going to kill anyone's system... heh.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • MachiavelliMachiavelli Join Date: 2003-07-27 Member: 18468Members
    Look at it this way, if you don't lower it you are just reducing the number of people who _could_ play your map. While I will admit, the people who don't have the rig needed to run more than 4mb of texture probably arn't a huge group and won't be the difference between your map being successful or a total flop, it is a good idea to try to reduce it down to 4mb.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • Generic_HumanoidGeneric_Humanoid Join Date: 2004-06-12 Member: 29255Members
    4MB isn't a magic number. The .3mbs isn't going to make a difference to anyone.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • DarkSeraphDarkSeraph Join Date: 2004-06-07 Member: 29174Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-Caboose+Jun 15 2004, 03:48 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Caboose @ Jun 15 2004, 03:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I do beleive that a majority of people have at least 32mb gfx cards and can handle maps like that... Just don't go over 8 megs... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    in that case is there a point in there being a w-poly limit of 800? of course ridiculous polys will make people lag, but the specific numbers mean nothing then, yeah? it's more what fps people get than w-polys.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • ThaldarinThaldarin Alonzi&#33; Join Date: 2003-07-15 Member: 18173Members, Constellation
    <!--QuoteBegin-DarkSeraph+Jun 16 2004, 05:33 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DarkSeraph @ Jun 16 2004, 05:33 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Caboose+Jun 15 2004, 03:48 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Caboose @ Jun 15 2004, 03:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I do beleive that a majority of people have at least 32mb gfx cards and can handle maps like that... Just don't go over 8 megs... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I am stuck using a 32Meg card at the moment. And with Steam I get an average of 20-30 FPS with NS, without steam 50-60 FPS. I think you will find there is no need to accomodate for 32Meg cards or below, because they won't bother playing NS due to poor performance. In my opinion Flayra should put the Lowest Recommended Playing Specs to 64MB Gfx. That would also mean we could push some of the limits up too <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
Sign In or Register to comment.