


Community Map Development
#21
Posted 29 May 2014 - 07:18 AM

#22
Posted 29 May 2014 - 07:24 AM
#23
Posted 29 May 2014 - 07:38 AM

#24
Posted 29 May 2014 - 09:56 AM
zhajin, on 28 May 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:
that being said given ui2.0 and PGI's own difficulty in dealing with its own code, do you really want to use any map developer they would be able to release?
Star Trek Online very successfully created and integrated a mission making tool called The Foundry. Players could create their own missions which were quickly and easily vetted by Cryptic, but Cryptic did populate the tool with all the assets it had at it's disposal at the time...ships, maps, effects, logic trees, etc. It is probably way more involved than anything MWO would need, but it worked beautifully and probably saved the game from closing down forever as it was developed during a particularly rough and content lacking period. I don't see how making maps could be anymore complex. than that, and this player base certainly has the desire.
#25
Posted 29 May 2014 - 09:58 AM
Ihasa, on 29 May 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:
Star Trek Online very successfully created and integrated a mission making tool called The Foundry. Players could create their own missions which were quickly and easily vetted by Cryptic, but Cryptic did populate the tool with all the assets it had at it's disposal at the time...ships, maps, effects, logic trees, etc. It is probably way more involved than anything MWO would need, but it worked beautifully and probably saved the game from closing down forever as it was developed during a particularly rough and content lacking period. I don't see how making maps could be anymore complex. than that, and this player base certainly has the desire.
Lets not forget they did the same thing in City of Heroes/Villians with huge success.
#26
Posted 29 May 2014 - 10:04 AM
It's been mentioned numerous times.
Even though the engine is free to the public, and all they would have to do is put out their stuff (trees, buildings etc).
I'm sure most maps would be crap, but there would be some gems as well.
It simply won't happen. I wish it would. I'm pretty good at 3d modeling and I've made maps for games before, but...it ain't gonna happen.
NEVER have I wished to be proven wrong more in my life.
Edited by verybad, 29 May 2014 - 10:05 AM.
#27
Posted 29 May 2014 - 10:19 AM
Quick make some more warhorns and cockpit garbage that we can sell for some cash!
#28
Posted 29 May 2014 - 10:28 AM
verybad, on 29 May 2014 - 10:04 AM, said:
It's been mentioned numerous times.
Even though the engine is free to the public, and all they would have to do is put out their stuff (trees, buildings etc).
I'm sure most maps would be crap, but there would be some gems as well.
It simply won't happen. I wish it would. I'm pretty good at 3d modeling and I've made maps for games before, but...it ain't gonna happen.
NEVER have I wished to be proven wrong more in my life.
Maybe that will end up being their position at the time. Who knows, with enough pressure maybe PGI would be influenced to change it so, just like the community did with consumables.
#29
Posted 29 May 2014 - 10:32 AM
If it's quality, I'd advise them to look at how Planetside 2's been doing with their player studio where people can make in-game items and then share the profits with the company. EA put out a very specific set of parameters that every camo, or decal, etc. must meet. If they pass those criteria, then the art department give them a look, make changes, and decide on implementation. And the products that make it through have been pretty great.
I think a great idea might be to do something similar for MWO: give all the specific points the dev's want in a map. Maps, no matter how good they may look, are nixed if they don't meet those criteria. Step 2, open the test server for 24 hours every week (Saturday's, say...) and put 3 promising community maps on the test server. After a player has dropped in all three, a pop-up poll asks them which is the best. After so many weeks, the highest voted map is looked at by PGI, changes added, and they consider it for implementation.
Make it a basic understanding that maps become PGI property, no money is involved, but the player get's his/her big fat name on the loading screen (and maybe a listing in the credits, you know, for their career/professional documentation).
I'm not sure what it costs to run the Test Server but if you had it going 24/7 or at the very least once a week, plop changes on there, watch telemetry, etc. it might be beneficial for more than just the map thing. Even though pop has been low in test, if it were a dependable server more might play. I know personally, I haven't bothered with it because I don't want to redownload the test client and have to update it...since I only activate it once in a blue moon.
Edited by TygerLily, 29 May 2014 - 10:35 AM.
#30
Posted 29 May 2014 - 12:42 PM
zhajin, on 28 May 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:
Not trying to sound mean or anything so don't take it wrong*
That is the way PC gaming has been operating since the beginning. Hell the original COD was held up for almost a decade as #1 FPS as a result of community maps and modding. And the original modern warfare "MOD" by the community is what drove it to where it got. It was when they tried to yank private severs from the players to feed on DLC is when it went to the crap joke it is now. And why I will not admit to mapping and modding on there for 7 years. (defending their decision by calling the pc community a bunch of hackers) btw I got banned from their products for a petition that received a few million sigs, so they can suck it btw.
But the irony in this is I do believe PGI started off as a couple guys making MODS. So don't believe they don't realize what is possible from the community. There are reasons, but money and bugs are not the root. I think pride and self worth may factor in quite a bit.
BTW, I wasted years doing it thinking I was helping to get kicked in the teeth. So don't think this is me trying to want another go at it.
#32
Posted 29 May 2014 - 01:04 PM
SLDF Xavier, on 28 May 2014 - 06:40 AM, said:
3) The community has far more man power than PGI even if the community were to only have a 5% success rate at designing maps the volume of maps would ensure that many new maps would be available for additions
Agree. If one out of twenty passed inspection we'd still be miles ahead of where we're at. And happy to be involved.
Tom Sawyer, on 29 May 2014 - 10:19 AM, said:
They save money. It's just as good

#33
Posted 29 May 2014 - 01:20 PM
Roland, on 29 May 2014 - 12:45 PM, said:
I dunno some of them were so huge they could feel like two! Between Co-Op multiplayer and the plethora of fan made and Single player maps converted, league specific.... I probably had 40+ maps, and I only played the league and mainstream stuff.
#34
Posted 29 May 2014 - 01:24 PM
On one hand, I'd love to create maps for MWO. I'm a professional environment artist in the industry, so I'm confident I could work within their establish art style, palettes, etc. I also know there are other game professionals that play that would be able to provide quality content as well.
Then on the other hand, I know there's a lot of players that are just not up to snuff to create quality maps. Fan-made maps have a certain "stink" to them that is hard to ignore. I'd hate to see the beautiful work PGI has done get sullied with crappy fan-made maps.
If they could somehow provide players with a set of art-style guidelines and charge a non-refundable admission fee to submit a map, I think that might weed out the wheat from the chaff. I'd suggest the equivalent of $25 per submitted map. That would at least cover the expenses for somebody to look at the map and decide if it was a worthy submission to be adapted/further worked on or something that would be better relegated to the trash folder.
#35
Posted 29 May 2014 - 01:24 PM
#36
Posted 29 May 2014 - 04:00 PM
Bhael Fire, on 29 May 2014 - 01:24 PM, said:
On one hand, I'd love to create maps for MWO. I'm a professional environment artist in the industry, so I'm confident I could work within their establish art style, palettes, etc. I also know there are other game professionals that play that would be able to provide quality content as well.
Then on the other hand, I know there's a lot of players that are just not up to snuff to create quality maps. Fan-made maps have a certain "stink" to them that is hard to ignore. I'd hate to see the beautiful work PGI has done get sullied with crappy fan-made maps.
If they could somehow provide players with a set of art-style guidelines and charge a non-refundable admission fee to submit a map, I think that might weed out the wheat from the chaff. I'd suggest the equivalent of $25 per submitted map. That would at least cover the expenses for somebody to look at the map and decide if it was a worthy submission to be adapted/further worked on or something that would be better relegated to the trash folder.
That's the thing about maps, if you have private games, then you just have to make sure everyone in that game has all the maps. Not everyone has to have every map. shouldn't take a huge change in the current code to let this game work like every single game out there that can be modded and played mp...
I agree, most fanmade maps (or other content) aren't professional grade. Some however are. PGI could pick a few from the best and add those to the vanilla installment, and it's pretty much everyone wins.
Edited by verybad, 29 May 2014 - 04:01 PM.
#37
Posted 30 May 2014 - 04:08 AM
Dozier, on 29 May 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:
That is the way PC gaming has been operating since the beginning. Hell the original COD was held up for almost a decade as #1 FPS as a result of community maps and modding. And the original modern warfare "MOD" by the community is what drove it to where it got. It was when they tried to yank private severs from the players to feed on DLC is when it went to the crap joke it is now. And why I will not admit to mapping and modding on there for 7 years. (defending their decision by calling the pc community a bunch of hackers) btw I got banned from their products for a petition that received a few million sigs, so they can suck it btw.
But the irony in this is I do believe PGI started off as a couple guys making MODS. So don't believe they don't realize what is possible from the community. There are reasons, but money and bugs are not the root. I think pride and self worth may factor in quite a bit.
BTW, I wasted years doing it thinking I was helping to get kicked in the teeth. So don't think this is me trying to want another go at it.
I guess my sarcasm didn't come through on that original post I was hoping that my mentioning mechwarrior 4 and community developed maps that people would understand that the concept of community content has been around much longer than my "its the new thing comment would have led you to beleive"
either way yes I know what you are saying it has been around for quite sometime with huge success, I know of very few times where community generated content was viewed in a negative light.
Roland, on 29 May 2014 - 12:45 PM, said:
yes we did, if you downloaded map packs 1, 2, 3 from MWL when we were playing in competition leagues, I went back an looked and my map rotation list for my dedicated server had 427 maps on it.
Bhael Fire, on 29 May 2014 - 01:24 PM, said:
On one hand, I'd love to create maps for MWO. I'm a professional environment artist in the industry, so I'm confident I could work within their establish art style, palettes, etc. I also know there are other game professionals that play that would be able to provide quality content as well.
Then on the other hand, I know there's a lot of players that are just not up to snuff to create quality maps. Fan-made maps have a certain "stink" to them that is hard to ignore. I'd hate to see the beautiful work PGI has done get sullied with crappy fan-made maps.
If they could somehow provide players with a set of art-style guidelines and charge a non-refundable admission fee to submit a map, I think that might weed out the wheat from the chaff. I'd suggest the equivalent of $25 per submitted map. That would at least cover the expenses for somebody to look at the map and decide if it was a worthy submission to be adapted/further worked on or something that would be better relegated to the trash folder.
I understand your point and I am not implying that every fan made map would get added to the game, there would have to be a review and approval process in order for the map to be added to the game.
verybad, on 29 May 2014 - 04:00 PM, said:
That's the thing about maps, if you have private games, then you just have to make sure everyone in that game has all the maps. Not everyone has to have every map. shouldn't take a huge change in the current code to let this game work like every single game out there that can be modded and played mp...
I agree, most fanmade maps (or other content) aren't professional grade. Some however are. PGI could pick a few from the best and add those to the vanilla installment, and it's pretty much everyone wins.
I am not asking for a mod that allows us to insert content into an individuals game I am asking for a map submission process by which we send our content to MWO they review and maybe release for public viewing/voting and then add 1 map at a certain given interval of their choosing. this would not require people to download and have the maps because they would become a part of MWO's broader content review/release process
#38
Posted 30 May 2014 - 04:39 AM
they come consist of a topographic map, the terrain map(that's what we see), a heat map.
and that's the content of maps I know. There might be even more layers aligned on one map for the game game engine.
quite complicated stuff if you ask me and pgi engineered those features themselves, I can understand them not to throw their know-how to the public.
Edited by kesmai, 30 May 2014 - 04:40 AM.
#39
Posted 30 May 2014 - 04:46 AM
kesmai, on 30 May 2014 - 04:39 AM, said:
they come consist of a topographic map, the terrain map(that's what we see), a heat map.
and that's the content of maps I know. There might be even more layers aligned on one map for the game game engine.
quite complicated stuff if you ask me and pgi engineered those features themselves, I can understand them not to throw their know-how to the public.
Heat maps are not a new concept either its mere a set of location variable changes which have been implemented in other games as well, lava killing you or causing you to get hot is not a concept solely isolated to this game. again I do not think that some of these concepts are beyond the communities understanding, and if they think that then they don't fully understand the knowledge/competency of their userbase which screams to a whole different level of problems.
#40
Posted 30 May 2014 - 04:54 AM
SLDF Xavier, on 28 May 2014 - 06:40 AM, said:
I remember in mechwarrior 4 we had hundreds of maps which kept all the maps feeling fresh.
I know I am not the only one here that wishes PGI would let us "The Community" develop maps for them to review and include in the game cycle. I would like to outline why I think PGI should open up map creation to the community.
1) PGI makes no money from maps therefore they have little incentive to keep creating new ones
2) PGI has limited resources and everytime they work on a map it draw time away from developers who could be working on mech design/content
3) The community has far more man power than PGI even if the community were to only have a 5% success rate at designing maps the volume of maps would ensure that many new maps would be available for additions
4) some of the best maps I ever played on mechwarrior 4 were community developed maps.
5) Since PGI could focus more on content that makes them more money they would in turn be able to add content to the game faster that they cna profit from.
6) It would give PGI the ability to add alot of new content to help keep the game feeling new.
7) it allows the community to feel like they are actually contributing to the game (crowd-sourcing is the new thing in case you haven't heard)
So in recap allowing the community to develop maps would MAKE PGI MORE MONEY, GIVE THE COMMUNITY MORE CONTENT, LETS THE COMMUNITY FEEL LIKE THEY ARE A CONTRIBUTING PART OF THE GAME, and KEEPS THE GAME FEELING NEW AND FRESH BY INCREASING GAME CONTENT RELEASE.
So someone please tell me why there is any negative in what I have stated above
Player created maps can be amazing. I think the success rate might be lower than 5% when you talk about all the optimizing that goes into them these days, however, I've see maps of higher quality than the devs put out happen in many games. It does take a dedicated group of people to make it happen though.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users