Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Not many new UT4 maps using meshes, why?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Not many new UT4 maps using meshes, why?

    Hi folks,

    I have had a browse of some of the new maps in production and it seems as if there're not that many maps being made which use meshes,.. is there a reason for this? Are there meshes available in the editor but are just not being used? If so, why not? PC limitations? Laziness? Too difficult to use? I have yet to see a new map with any real use of meshes - this troubles me. Are we only going to get new BSP-heavy maps which are from mappers/gamers without much imagination or creativity or is it simply that there're just too many old PCs about that wouldn't be able to handle the new graphics? *I admit, my current PC set-up would probably struggle with the new graphics.

    Thoughts? Screenshots of available meshes in editor content lists?

    #2
    BSP is often used to 'whitebox' levels for testing. Meshing comes much later once the designer is happy with the overall flow of the level.

    Comment


      #3
      Click the following link:

      https://forums.unrealtournament.com/...l=1#post141321

      Comment


        #4
        Yeah since movement is probably/hopefully still WIP they are going to have to make tweaks at some point and adding meshes can make that more difficult. People will start fleshing out their maps once they know they can finalize the layout and stuff

        Comment


          #5
          https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest...gn_workflowmap
          Portfolio / DM-Morpheus / CTF-Coret

          Comment


            #6
            Ok, so I'm not gonna take that as gospel - I know full well about the stages used to make GOOD, visually appealing, fun, playable polished maps, (I have been making maps since 2002), but I also know that many players, (UT99 and even UT2003/4), wanted to play in BSP-only maps with very poor lighting and build quality, who refused point-blank to help test, vote for or play any maps that were even just slightly visually appealing, (maps with meshes, skilfully created lights, particle effects, fire, electrics, sound, effects etc etc). Many TERRIBLY made maps were nearly always chosen over better looking maps because they allowed lazy players to spam the bejezus out of anything that moved with no such care about skills, jumps, falls, risks, jump-pads, grav-boots etc,.. all they wanted were rubbish, BSP-heavy maps with very poor attention to detail and virtually no Z-axis play - aka, box-maps,.. so, who's gonna stand by what some of you have said to back it up or do you accept I have a perfectly valid point?

            In short - is it gonna be worth my time learning the new editor, paying for the subscription, my incurring electrical and hardware expenses to run this new editor and game to make good looking, fun, polished maps, with hours and hours of laborious, tedious, difficult, slow, tiring work spent making them if all that's going to happen is that even new gamers are going to vote for box-maps over creative, fun, exciting, challenging maps which have been made with skill, love and care? Is it going to be worth my time and money? Is it? Or isn't it?

            Time to find out,.. here goes,....
            Last edited by R3plicant; 02-28-2015, 06:04 PM.

            Comment


              #7
              If you look around the forums a bit you will find that there are already threads conceptual art for a few of the maps that are currently being played. They are just early iterations of the maps that will allow us to test out the movements and other core game values currently. Gooba did a pretty nice bunch of art for the map Outside https://forums.unrealtournament.com/...e-Castle-Theme

              No one can say for sure how people will vote when the game is out in full release but if you think you can make some nice polished maps I would recommend you go ahead and do so. Cpt Migraine is already doing so and his map is likely to be in one of the weekly builds in the very near future. Showing off your talents with a new engine and in a game that is in pre alpha can also get you set up as a contributor, which in return will also mean that your subscription to the engine will be free. It's a chance you will just have to take I guess. Good luck!!

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Bubbaxm2 View Post
                If you look around the forums a bit you will find that there are already threads conceptual art for a few of the maps that are currently being played. They are just early iterations of the maps that will allow us to test out the movements and other core game values currently. Gooba did a pretty nice bunch of art for the map Outside https://forums.unrealtournament.com/...e-Castle-Theme

                No one can say for sure how people will vote when the game is out in full release but if you think you can make some nice polished maps I would recommend you go ahead and do so. Cpt Migraine is already doing so and his map is likely to be in one of the weekly builds in the very near future. Showing off your talents with a new engine and in a game that is in pre alpha can also get you set up as a contributor, which in return will also mean that your subscription to the engine will be free. It's a chance you will just have to take I guess. Good luck!!
                Hey Bubbaxm2 - I did indeed see some of Neil's work, and GOOD it is! He's got a passion for the game I haven't seen for a long time, he's clearly got what it takes! I remember when I first saw some of Sjoerd De Jong, (Hourences), early work and boy, that blew me away and it was one of a few instances with seeing great mapping with the UT99 game/editor that got me into map-making in the first place. Gooba's work looks great too - that castle looks intensely good with regards to the visuals he's envisaged, (and masterfully put to, 'paint').

                Bubbaxm2, are there any other active, creative, skilled, passionate mappers, (non professional I hasten to add), who you'd say I ought to keep an eye on? Thanks.

                Comment


                  #9
                  FYI, all the maps in-game are official Epic maps not community made, and the only community made ones they really talk about tend to be meshed out. Will there be a ton of BSP maps done by community members? You can count on it... should that discourage you? No, why should it... if anything it will just make your work stand out more. You should welcome it.

                  UT4 modding discussion: irc.globalgamers.net #UTModders
                  Contrib Digest | UT2341 - Henrik's UT4 Dev Blog | Twitter

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by R3plicant View Post
                    Ok, so I'm not gonna take that as gospel - I know full well about the stages used to make GOOD, visually appealing, fun, playable polished maps, (I have been making maps since 2002), but I also know that many players, (UT99 and even UT2003/4), wanted to play in BSP-only maps with very poor lighting and build quality, who refused point-blank to help test, vote for or play any maps that were even just slightly visually appealing, (maps with meshes, skilfully created lights, particle effects, fire, electrics, sound, effects etc etc). Many TERRIBLY made maps were nearly always chosen over better looking maps because they allowed lazy players to spam the bejezus out of anything that moved with no such care about skills, jumps, falls, risks, jump-pads, grav-boots etc,.. all they wanted were rubbish, BSP-heavy maps with very poor attention to detail and virtually no Z-axis play - aka, box-maps,.. so, who's gonna stand by what some of you have said to back it up or do you accept I have a perfectly valid point?
                    I have to disagree. Players didn't want bad looking maps. They wanted good looking maps that performed well but most players didn't have supercomputers to run the latest hourences map (stuffed to overflowing with framerate killing, lag inducing eyecandy) smoothly. They wanted to play the game, not watch a slideshow, take pretty screenshots and wait 10 years for hardware advances to allow them to play a map smoothly. Atmosphere was appreciated but if the map didn't perform well for most players it wasn't going to be very popular online. Even hourences finally got that right with Rankin though he failed to understand what made Rankin so popular and do it again with Redkin (which performed abysmally even on what was very high end hardware at the time).

                    Eyecandy might draw players in but gameplay is what keeps them. A map might look fantastic but if it only gets 30 FPS (and choppy at that) it won't play very well so hardly anyone is going to play it much. On the other hand a map that doesn't look nearly as good but has a half decent layout and practically everyone gets good FPS on is going to be fairly popular. The more popular maps strike a balance between atmosphere and performance, they look good and perform well.
                    Last edited by MoxNix; 02-28-2015, 07:14 PM.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by MoxNix View Post
                      I have to disagree. Players didn't want bad looking maps. They wanted good looking maps that performed well but most players didn't have supercomputers to run the latest hourences map (stuffed to overflowing with framerate killing, lag inducing eyecandy) smoothly. They wanted to play the game, not watch a slideshow with pretty screenshots. Atmosphere was appreciated but if the map didn't perform well for most players it wasn't going to be very popular online. Even hourences finally got that right with Rankin though he failed to understand what made Rankin so popular and do it again with Redkin (which performed abysmally even on what was very high end hardware at the time).

                      Eyecandy might draw players in but gameplay is what keeps them. A map might look fantastic but if it only gets 30 FPS (and choppy at that) it won't play very well so hardly anyone is going to play it much. On the other hand a map that doesn't look nearly as good but has a half decent layout and practically everyone gets good FPS on is going to be fairly popular. The most popular maps strike a balance between atmosphere and performance, they look good and perform well.
                      In my years making maps for UT99,. I would frequently ask for help to help test my maps,.. I would TRY to work them so that they would play smoothly on the lower end rigs around at the time - yet too few bothered to help, so what happened was I'd release a map for TESTING,. and no one helped - and when they did, too few even bothered to tell me what the FPS were doing or if there were any lagging issues etc,.. I had to judge it all myself on what was then a high end rig for UT99,.. I set my maps with the basic candy to make them look ok,.. and so they played well, but in the end it was all a right mess because I didn't get the help I needed to get the maps playable on lower end rigs - and subsequently no one liked my maps and had the audacity to blame me for the map's poor performance on their rigs. Ruddy cheek.

                      So in after almost 10yrs mapping and after frequently having my maps ignored in favour of box-maps, I finally stopped mapping, (it was costing me a fortune in electricity, health and really my attention should have been on other much more important things), besides, UT99 had pretty much been dead from 2010 anyway, (well, it was on the servers I frequented).

                      Here I am now, deciding if it's worth getting back into it. I do need a ~£300/£400 upgrade to make my rig suitable for the new editor/engine and I simply don't have that kind of money to spare on a game which may or may not become populated enough to make it worth my while. I'm considering asking for donations, but really, I'm unsure what the widely held consensus is on the potential for the new game. I digress.

                      The new game ships with maps by Epic's mappers? If so, I'd like to see if I could make anything, (to the standard expected of a map made by Epic, naturally), that'd be considered for inclusion in any future UT4 distributions.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Yea I'm not saying future ones won't be community made but pretty sure what they want to do is set the bar on a lot of stuff and show the pipeline. This is why you see what you see. They have shown us mesh assets too, but they want to develop a workflow that makes such assets as modular and reusable as possible.

                        UT4 modding discussion: irc.globalgamers.net #UTModders
                        Contrib Digest | UT2341 - Henrik's UT4 Dev Blog | Twitter

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by R3plicant View Post
                          Hey Bubbaxm2 - I did indeed see some of Neil's work, and GOOD it is! He's got a passion for the game I haven't seen for a long time, he's clearly got what it takes! I remember when I first saw some of Sjoerd De Jong, (Hourences), early work and boy, that blew me away and it was one of a few instances with seeing great mapping with the UT99 game/editor that got me into map-making in the first place. Gooba's work looks great too - that castle looks intensely good with regards to the visuals he's envisaged, (and masterfully put to, 'paint').

                          Bubbaxm2, are there any other active, creative, skilled, passionate mappers, (non professional I hasten to add), who you'd say I ought to keep an eye on? Thanks.
                          I may be biased as I am not the most artistic person to walk this earth but I think that anyone currently working on this game is very talented, passionate and skilled. As you have mentioned yourself, the amount of time and resources it takes to create a map or anything that will be in this game is immense and so far I haven't seen anyone that doesn't do so rather humbly. As Henrik said the current maps in the rotation are all Epic made and will get prettier when the time comes as will some of the community made maps, it's just not exactly easy for the community to know exactly how a map should look yet when the exact direction the art will need to take hasn't been completely laid out yet.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            R3plicant, it seems like you may be new to the forums and may not understand how Epic is going about making this version of UT. They started collaborating with the community on day 1 instead of year 3 after release which would be more normal. The game is still in pre-alpha and at a point where we would not normally be able to see it. For more info, go HERE.

                            The Epic maps will definitely be meshed when they are done. In fact, they just showed off a whole series of meshes on a recent Twitch stream that will be available to mappers also at some point (I would guess sometime in the next couple of months). Here's an image of them.
                            Unreal Carnage.com UT4 Maps: DM-Maelstrom DM-SpaceNoxx

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X