Metanet Forums

Most new mapmakers (noobs)
have always thought that maps are the best when they are really really really (is that too many??) hard.
I thought so myself back in the days...
I have come to learn otherwise, yes some good maps are extremely hard but they have other aspects as-well that make them better. e.g:
Their looks are pleasing
the Aesthetics are great
and last of all but the most important:
They are FUN!!

Any good map is always fun..
a frustrating map is so... so.. well.. frustrating..

A fun map that is ugly is still better than a frustrating overdone ugly map nonetheless making it pwetty and enjoyable to play helps.

Recently I have noticed allot of noobs saying:
''This is my hardest complete-able map''
or
''this is the hardest map I've made so-far''

I don't know what they are trying to accomplish.. fine if you want to make a hard map that has too many spammed objects, its fine with me but if you are trying to make a good map that everybody will want to play then (you don't have to do what I say next but I would advise it) try follow these lines

Game-play
Game-play is what makes a map fun
depending on if your making a mine-jumper to a race game-play is still the main factor..
Make the game fun to play give it some enemies but make them flow into the game.

Enemies
Enemies are the things that kill n (duh!)
enemies is the main factor that affects game-play, placing too many of one type in one area is called spamming and is usually frowned upon.. instead place two well place enemies..
avoiding enemies is fun but only too a point. don't over do it.
trying to mix all the enemies into one level to make the level hard is frustrating and ugly. rather stick to one style and keep with it while being conscious about not over doing that style.

Looks and and aesthetics that flow with the game-play
I would recommend atobs theory of form and function= http://forum.therealn.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1222
when objects are just spammed all-over the page with just some e-tiles to support n and the objects are to make the game hard.. then.. well it isn't very appealing to the eye..
cut down on spamming and add a nice atmosphere by adding tiles that suit the map you are making without obstructing the game-play.
objects look great when flow into the tile-set but still affects the game-play in a good way.. pointless objects that are just there to look pretty is sometimes frowned upon if there are too many because it takes up loading time.

thats about it from me concerning this...
hope it helps...




yours unfaithfully and not HIV positive-
Naczz

Hmm, would this be too hard?
No advertising is intended.
And yes, I thought that a hard map was a good map in the beginning.

a good amount of difficulty is where there is one factor that just tips it over the edge from easy to hard. without that thing, the map would be bland and easy. With it, its annoying, but not too hard. The key is getting it right on that edge

Superpok wrote:a good amount of difficulty is where there is one factor that just tips it over the edge from easy to hard. without that thing, the map would be bland and easy. With it, its annoying, but not too hard. The key is getting it right on that edge

IMO;

One can represent difficulty with spicy food. A map can come in hard and easy versions, both with the same concept and similar gameplay; but some people like spicy food and some people do not like spicy food. An enchilada plate can have a spicy version and a less spicy bland version. Some people like hard maps and some people like easier maps. The taste (concept) and the amount of spice usually stay fairly independent.

Put no spice in your map and it will taste too bland for some. Put too much spice (Rocketspam anyone?) and nobody will have the stomach for your map. I imagine the spamming noobs as holding a gallon of chili powder above their map and pouring, under the impression that it will have much more flavor. (IMO, nobody should serve a dish they can't eat themselves.)

(I think I'll ditch this metaphor now before it gets out of hand.)

OneSevenNine wrote:

Superpok wrote:

OneSevenNine wrote:

Superpok wrote:a good amount of difficulty is where there is one factor that just tips it over the edge from easy to hard. without that thing, the map would be bland and easy. With it, its annoying, but not too hard. The key is getting it right on that edge

IMO;

One can represent difficulty with spicy food. A map can come in hard and easy versions, both with the same concept and similar gameplay; but some people like spicy food and some people do not like spicy food. An enchilada plate can have a spicy version and a less spicy bland version. Some people like hard maps and some people like easier maps. The taste (concept) and the amount of spice usually stay fairly independent.

Put no spice in your map and it will taste too bland for some. Put too much spice (Rocketspam anyone?) and nobody will have the stomach for your map. I imagine the spamming noobs as holding a gallon of chili powder above their map and pouring, under the impression that it will have much more flavor. (IMO, nobody should serve a dish they can't eat themselves.)

(I think I'll ditch this metaphor now before it gets out of hand.)

Yes I have also said that but there is a difference between a good looking, great gameplaying hard map with great difficulty and a ugly badly placed over spammed hard map... the former is actually fun... that is what i am trying to say and explain

I don't understand why noobs think that way. Even when I was new to this, I never thought harder maps were necessarily more fun. The only thing I thought in the beginning (and I soon got rid of this mentality) was that symmetry was good, even though I never made one :P I originally looked up to Metanet's levels, and I think that's why I perceived what made maps' quality the way I did.

OneSevenNine wrote:IMO, nobody should serve a dish they can't eat themselves.

In other words, newbies make terrible chefs.

Saying most new mappers feel that way is a bit of an exaggeration, but quite a few do.

I think the biggest factor is not so much most of them thinking hard is best, but a feeling that you shouldn't have empty space in a map so they throw some enemies in. Plus new mappers rarely playtest properly.

Then there are the idiots who feel a sense of triumph because no one can beat their map.

wolfgang wrote:Then there are the idiots who feel a sense of triumph because no one can beat their map.

>_>
oops

i like the spicy food analogy

i think the blank space theory works well, and then they figure out what there doing wrong and fill that blank space with a good map

i, of course skipped the enemies crappy part, but never progressed on to the good mapmaking stage

i got neither world :(

i always thought that if i could beat it, it was good

i don't know, if a map is too easy, then its no fun. of course, a lot of noobs can make maps that are really fun to play, but have spammed enemies and crappy tilesets