Blog Archives

« Help me help you Light Me Warm »

Me on: de_view_update1 (Dec 1, 2005)

Since dumping Battlefield 2 due to its bugs and irritations, I've started playing CS:S more. The other day I hopped onto a server, but the map ended pretty soon and suddenly a new one was downloading. I rarely have the patience to let a new map download (I usually stick to the official maps), but this time I thought I'd give it a chance, just for a change of scenery.

The map I got wasn't terrific, but it wasn't awful either (after all, it had made the rotation of a reputable server so it couldn't be all bad). What struck out at me however were some design features that I found quite unique and interesting; the sorts of things that I would never have thought of. It also has some common errors that could have easily been remedied (and represent a strange variation in quality throughout the map).

So, 'de_view_update1' then...

I like: the lookout

By far my favourite feature of the map is a small bunker that sits atop a hill giving a nice, wide view of the map surface. It's not a great view, but generous enough to give a sniper some good opportunities, whilst also giving the defending team plenty of room to either find cover, take another route, or take out the sniper. It's neat in that it's not overpowering (snipers won't rush to it every round), but the occasional time that it is manned, it will cause the CTs a few problems if they're not careful.

...and as an added bonus, I think it looks pretty neat too.

I like: bombsite B

Well, actually... I'm not a fan of the presentation of bombsite B or how it fits in. It's basically an oversized board room underneath the ground with a large set of windows on the roof that basically define the street. In that respect, it doesn't work. This sort of configuration has been used in other maps, but I've never seen it work well.

This bombsite however has two buildings either side, with lots of windows and a big view area into the bombsite below, such that the bombsite can be guarded from high above. The important thing here is that suddenly the room below doesn't feel as safe as it would have done; there is always the chance a CT sniper is in one of those buildings and will snipe you as soon as you try to plant the C4 on the table. Similarly, to get a good view into the bombsite as a CT, you expose yourself to any Terrorists on the surface.

There are also some interesting changes of gameplay dynamics to this area when the C4 is planted...

I like: this bit

I just think it looks quite nice.

I don't like: the flow

The worst bit of any map is playing it for the very first time, not knowing what to do or where to go. A map with good flow will guide you into the right direction, either through excess use of signs, or subtle hints and good layout.

This map fails in that respect. Playing as a CT I was instantly presented with a plethora of directions and routes to take, but I opted for the safe option of hanging back and moving with the pack. I'm sure all the routes would have taken me to roughly the right spots, but that doesn't make for interesting gameplay if everyone is segregated by taking a different route.

This is where I credit Cliffe for this tip, it's one of the first things I learnt in mapping for Counter-Strike, and also the most valuable: give teams a couple of main routes, but not a handful.

A couple of places consist of several routes starting in the same spot and ending in the same spot. One is just a building you can go straight through (minding the crates!) OR round to the left (minding the crates!) OR round to the right (minding the crates!) I can cope with that, but I always feel could have been done better.

That reminds me: this map is over its crate quota.

I don't like: the underground

This is what I don't understand. The map, itself, looks quite good above-ground, but the underground section is a big black mark. It's just a big blip in the variation of quality, showing that the designer could have done something so much better, but didn't.

First of all, it's underground, and basically a series of tunnels and rooms. That's a big fat "STOP!" already.

Secondly, it's dull. Observe as I enchant the powers of coloured pixels to illustrate my point using screenshots:

It's a room, full of crates. A dark room (lightened artificially by me.)

I don't like: (some of) the texturing work

Beginner's error really, but any corridor that looks like this is massively ugly and should be destroyed immediately:

What you see here is a corridor joining the bombsite B room. Note how the texture on the wall instantly changes from brick to plaster, how the floor is checkered tile, and how the brick of the corridor just looks out of place.

Note that the above shot is not two shots stitched together in the centre - those two textures really do bang into each other like that in the map.

In fact, it all looks out of place. Admittedly, getting things like this takes practise and observation of other maps, but it can be done and it should be done. It needs a proper doorway (doesn't even need a door, but some sort of structure would be nice) and a better segue between the two styles.

A staircase would be nice too (rather than a ramp); tiled slopes are extremely dangerous when wet.

I don't like: this room

It's just extremely dull and makes no architectural sense for a map that otherwise does fairly well maintaining a sense of realism.

I also like...

Finally...

This is what annoys me about this map: some of it is clearly built with skill and a good sense of visual design (see above screenshots), but other bits are totally opposite (see further above) and show sheer ugliness.

There are some important lessons here. Don't make the same mistakes, but bear in mind what worked.

« Help me help you Light Me Warm »

user comments

Kev at 21:59 on Dec 1, 2005

God, well you did say you were a harsh critic ;)

I remember when this map was released I was impressed how good it looked (for the most part), but was eventually put of by the maze like qualities of the thing. Still not knowing where your going after 10 minutes is no fun. I really liked bombsite A though and all the area in its vicinity.

Also I share your BF2 pains. I invariably end up pressing alt+F4 in dismay for anyone of a thousand reasons everytime I play :/

Ash at 23:11 on Dec 1, 2005

Excellent stuff. These type of articles could be a really good help, hopefully when I get back into mapping I'll take some of this stuff into account.

Do you have any tips on how to solve the texture problem you brought up? Before I left Opposing Source that was one of the problems I realised I'd have, but I never got to the stage of the map where I actually had to work around it.

Atrocity at 23:23 on Dec 1, 2005

Awesome review. You can tell it's done well because he doesn;t say this sucks or I don;t like this... and just uses the word because.

The texture problem at the end of the ramp makes me cringe. I don't see this as a harsh crtique at all, contructive critisism at it's finest. I get a lot of it at school, so I can see when it's made :)

smeerkat at 04:51 on Dec 2, 2005

Can you review inferno and nuke, the new Valve versions? Because they are really laggy for me, so I can't play them.

Fearian at 12:55 on Dec 2, 2005

ASH:
Id say use a doorfram to brak up different textures, or for the ramp, find a way to show where the wall ends and the ramp begins, ie. dont change texture on the corner, use two different walls. or just find another brick/plaster texture that works well with the other.

Addicted to Morphine at 16:10 on Dec 2, 2005

Awesome article, I hope there's more of the same coming in the future.

mikey at 19:24 on Dec 2, 2005

TBH i have a hard time believing that thats only one mappers work... i mean look at the second and fourth from the bottom... not even remotly the same skill-wise.. 2nd from bottom looks almost professional IMO

Slackiller at 06:27 on Dec 4, 2005

now thats a good map review :D

RabidMonkey at 23:49 on Dec 8, 2005

Some decent points there, a few of which I agree with. I never really was a huge fan of this map. If the layout was a lot smoother then I might have gotten past the visual issues I had with it, but the sheer size and layout of the thing made the issues with the visual aspects much easier to see, at least for me.

I also agree with mikey - It seemed like a few people worked on this, because the variation in themes and content, again. The exteriors looked pretty decent but most of the interior areas showed lack of some of the elements that made the outdoors work so well.

I'd love to see more of your opinions on other maps - Custom or official.

Augustus at 12:20 on Dec 20, 2005

To ASH:

The easiest way to solve the problem is to fix it architecturally.

Instead of having the brick texture in that image on the same angle as the corridor, I would have the bricks perfectly horizontal, and put virtical concrete pillars jutting out from the wall every time the brick texture needed to tile (also breaking it visualy). The final pillar would be at the end of the wall leading into the room, and the pillars concrete texture would also cover where the pillar jutts out on the inside of the room.

The two textures of the room and the concrete pillar would still bump into each other, but they would meet in a more realistic way, because noone would expect the pillar to be decorated the same as the wall of the room. As it stands there, people expect the end of the wall to be decorated the same as the rest of the wall, and that is the real problem.

I'd be interested to hear Daves thoughts on this solution?