81 replies to this topic

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Yes, Xavier, many of understand it takes a long time to produce a map -- the problem is (again Frozen City) the layout of the map itself and how people play the map just ******* sucks ***.

Not to mention I still get the gray texture bug on that map which doesn't help its overall tiny size and general shittiness by not being able to see wtf half of the stuff is! And that's before the visibility problems of the map being extremely foggy, anyway.

[Rokuzachi]

Quality.

There are some basic geo/collision issues on some of the maps that need to be fixed. I've found multiple areas where you have a clear LoS, but your beam/shot is blocked by invisible collision that extends beyond the geometry of the terrain/object. Some of the rocky cliff faces of forest colony and the tail of the crashed shuttle in Frozen City are notable instances of this.

Edited by Rokuzachi, 26 January 2013 - 01:40 AM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

you have seen in MW4 what was being delivered to crappy maps of users for a good map you need artistic talent and creativity, good understanding of the engine and a sense of realistic Scalierungen and dimensions, planned for MW4 and worked sometimes for weeks only on the basic skeleton for a map.

[Ice Storm]

Both Quality and quantity are importantm especially for a game like this. But quality is definitely more important. if the devs releases a bunch of sub par maps, those same players who becry the lack of maps are going to fill the forums on how bad the maps are.

Eather wait a little bit and know that the maps are going to be good (they better be good ) than get a bunch of half baked ones, where everybody is going to complain in any case.

[Elkarlo]

Don't want to mention it, but i think the Way WoT went is the right way:

First have a quantity set of Maps, about 12 or so.

Then start upping the Quality by removing the worse Map with a high quality Map.
We have some Nice Maps atm and some like Caustic some hate Caustic Valley which makes it a good Map Imo.

Colony as instance is a good to play Map but is somehow boring in its self. It's like Dust 2 of SC. Good map to play nobody Complains about but there are 3-4 Strategies with Counter etc..

River City night, is hated by 80% of the players.

When we would have 12 Different Maps River City night would go vanish and be replaced by something else.


I think we should allow Map Crafting Competitions from the Community, this will give us a realy nice Pool of Medicore Maps,
And thats what we need a pool of Medium Quality Maps, which is highlighted by several Highquality Maps.

Then we can replace lower Quality Maps with higher Quality Maps and increase the Map Pool time by time. But before we increase the Quality we need a good pool of Maps, so Quantity first.

[pistolero]

Quantity is an absolute MUST HAVE ... we are talking here about a game that is about fighting wars across the galaxy

how can anyone believe that this (Gameworld) setting can be represented by something like 4 or even 10 or 20 maps ?

Limited numbers of tiny maps is a gamebreaker for me .... or am i the only one who just quit after the same map came up for the 5th time in a row ?

At the moment we have more different factions than maps ... and this is a very bad situation


so PGI please use something like a random map generator with random spawn points and random time of day
or
release mapmaking tools to the comunity and take the 10 best every week

because even if 1 completly new and polished map would be released every month it simply would be to few ( at least for my taste )

[Trev Firestorm]

To be fair, River City night is bad because the night vision is done wrong and thermal vision is even worse (Worked thermal cameras for years, the thermal vision in this game looks like it was adjusted by a blind 5 year old)

Quantity over quality, they can always make extra passes at a map to refine it later (as they did with caustic, started with limited buildings, then changed spawn points to make them actually matter, then they added the groundwork for the pipelines, then later the pipes themselves) focus on the primary game play aspects first with just enough texturing to not be flat, release a bunch of such maps at once with announcements regarding the quality and polls to let the community decide/suggest what works and what doesn't.

[Khell DarkWolf]

I voted for Quantity, but we need New maps of Quantity.

None of these Frozen city maps with a night texture, or forest colony with a snow sugar coat on them.

We need this desperately to spice things up, otherwise community warfare won't have anything to show for it when it comes.

PGI already takes a long time trying to implement new content and to those of that want quality? Just look at the fact that we still haven't had any new maps since the beginning of the closed beta to now. Imagine now if they took even more quality to new future maps, we'll never see the daylight of any new maps at the rate were going.

Edited by Khell DarkWolf, 26 January 2013 - 02:39 AM.

[John MatriX82]

Looks like the poll is split 50 50 so far..

Atm I'd say quantity, but not in the means of different flavours of existing maps, but MOAR maps

At the moment, besides new mechs (that will come and on a regular basis), what this game desperately needs is new maps to keep the way you play it different from the usual ones..

We have 4 maps, and the "alternates" don't play any different from the standard ones; I may add that certain alternates are quite hatred (city night, standard frozen with that d a m n fog compared to night that is bright clear and lovable).

I'd be happy if devs would focus in releasing new nature maps, with progressive detail addition over time.

[StandingCow]

Easily quality. A bad quality map will cause nothing but issues and cause you to dislike the map.

Some of the maps now you can see a lot of imperfections, especially with thermal vision, you see gaps in things that shouldn't have gaps, etc.

[Solomon Ward]

It´s size that matters.

Out of the two i voted Quality.

[Flashback37]

No vote here. Need a 'happy median' option. More maps definitely, but not crappy ones.
Seems to me they could make more maps faster, then let us test them out. Maybe go lo-rez to start and then refine the textures later when balance and bugs have been worked out?

[FrostPaw]

I think it really depends on what you imagine each of those terms to mean.

Quantity sounds good, up until you get poorly balanced spawn points with clipping errors on cover and falling through the maps. This works fine in a community made situation where the cream of the fan made maps rise to the top and people just stop playing all the crap. When the maps are in a forced rotation it's very bad.

Quality sounds good too, up until you realize you're playing the same maps over and over for six months. That may just about work for the initial period but then you have to have a pipeline of new maps set up because playing those same maps for 7-12 months with one or two new ones is too repetitive and boring.

Personally, when I'm paying money and the developers want me to continue paying money, they should deliver both.

[Sean von Steinike]

They could make some maps VERY easy. Make gentle rolling hills, plains cut with some ravines and the like without a lot of clutter.

[GODzillaGSPB]

I think they should make an option for those who demand quanitity over quality. Just give those players some empty sandboxes to play in. Maybe in different colors, for at least a bit of diversity and detail.

[Reno Blade]

Imo the map development is the best part of the game where incremental development is showing its worth.
Some people might remember Caustic Valley with less details (specially the factory on thermal vision).

Work on multiple maps for "beta" state and then update them every patch with new buildings, canyons and other fancy stuff.
It sounds easy and i know it's not easy, but the result would give many more maps to "test" and to discuss about. Stuff will change and everyone likes to read changes in the patchnotes and test them out.
If the changes are "just" map improvements, the playerbase will still be more happy than waiting for everything to be complete.

It's the same as with the whole game, the game is playable now, but not complete, but that is way better than waiting years for a complete game and only see screenshots.

[MajorBorris]

The maps are so few and small that we can see the enemy base and where the enemy is going as soon as we spawn, or less then a minute later, no strategy needed. Thats where we stand after millions of dollars and years of development.

There is less incentive for f2p games to improve "free" content, just to make things that generate profit asap...from $30 mechs that some end up selling for a mech bay to $10 skins *per variant(that are stolen away the minute you pay for another) even $5 dasboard items, the trend is clear....Less for you is MORE$$$ for them.

Whether you choose quantity or quality will matter little as we are more likely to see few and small.

Edited by MajorBorris, 26 January 2013 - 05:11 AM.

[bug3at3r]

I'd like to have quantity in the long run, especially for CW. Be kinda lame if several of the planets had the exact same map, but maybe that's just me.

Honestly, we could theoretically have both if they'd let the community make maps as well.

[Kylere]

Outlines are fine, they do not have to be bitmapped, modelled, etc. I can just flip on thermal and go to it.

They could pump them out each week like this, it could bloody well be autogenned and the roughest part would be playtesting for sticky spots, but, hey, we are beta testers.

They could do night only maps in a freezing environment or a death valley one to negate thermal that would be night vision mandatory for the same reason.

[Antony Weiner]

Low quality means messed up collisions and inability to walk uphill, falling through map to purgatory, lrms flying through rocks, lasers hitting invisible walls, etc.