I've made a new D2 level. It's my first since I made Wyndham back in 1998 or so. It's called Feces 2 and is optimized for 2-4 players.
http://www.geocities.com/rocken4life/grax/feces2.zip
- Grax
New D2 level
I'm able to make more 3D levels (and add pretty textures and make cool designs etc.) but I generally choose not to. I do, however, try to incorporate some interesting designs, but I am and always have been a member of the Spaz school of thought: if a cool design gets in the way of gameplay, then maybe it should be kept in a level that is not intended for good gameplay.
I find that, for tactical gameplay, "Spaz-type" levels, if you want to call em such, are some of the best multiplayer levels ever made (whether or not they were actually made by Spaz).
And anyway, there are plenty of people who make/made good 3D levels, like Kruel (i think was his name), Karash (Mementemori), Sirian, Saline (Zeugma, Beer), and even Spaz when he felt like it (The Manes level 3, the Muses, etc.), among many, many others (Diedel, Sirius, NuKE, Sparhawk...).
It is not sufficient to simply make a level 2D in order for it to provide an interesting tactical game, but the high correlation between a level possessing tactical awesomeness and its being 2D is undeniable. The exceptions that prevent said correlation from being 1:1 are great because they provide 3D elements in a tactical level, but examples of these are rare (I would list 3 Brothers by Sirian as one of these important "3D yet tactical" exceptions).
But anyway... I can understand someone being a lil tired of 2D/rectangular lvls after 10 yrs of Descent. ^_^
- Grax
I find that, for tactical gameplay, "Spaz-type" levels, if you want to call em such, are some of the best multiplayer levels ever made (whether or not they were actually made by Spaz).
And anyway, there are plenty of people who make/made good 3D levels, like Kruel (i think was his name), Karash (Mementemori), Sirian, Saline (Zeugma, Beer), and even Spaz when he felt like it (The Manes level 3, the Muses, etc.), among many, many others (Diedel, Sirius, NuKE, Sparhawk...).
It is not sufficient to simply make a level 2D in order for it to provide an interesting tactical game, but the high correlation between a level possessing tactical awesomeness and its being 2D is undeniable. The exceptions that prevent said correlation from being 1:1 are great because they provide 3D elements in a tactical level, but examples of these are rare (I would list 3 Brothers by Sirian as one of these important "3D yet tactical" exceptions).
But anyway... I can understand someone being a lil tired of 2D/rectangular lvls after 10 yrs of Descent. ^_^
- Grax
Grax,
you are constructing a tight correlation between a level being tactically good and being 2D.
Imo this is not the case. I think the problem is that most Descent players - being so fond of their 6dof-ness - still think 2D and find it difficult to maneuver a true 3D environment. Hence they aren't able to pull off good tactics in such levels.
Btw, I hate Spaz-type levels with a passion.
you are constructing a tight correlation between a level being tactically good and being 2D.
Imo this is not the case. I think the problem is that most Descent players - being so fond of their 6dof-ness - still think 2D and find it difficult to maneuver a true 3D environment. Hence they aren't able to pull off good tactics in such levels.
Btw, I hate Spaz-type levels with a passion.
I don't hate Spaz's maps, so much as I think they are overrated. The biggest problem is that there is very little application of the Y-axis.
In Unreal Tournament, there is a heavy emphasis on Y-axis (technically Z-axis in their terms) in maps. If you look at most of the levels that came with it, and indeed the most popular homebrew maps, you'll see that the designs are very multi-tiered, with many layers of ramps and catwalks. In several ways, despite being a "ground pounder" game, they use the Y-axis a lot more than we do. The players themselves can't "fly," but it's nevertheless the case that threats can come from a broad range of places, not just straight ahead or to the left or right. Elevation is a huge factor and he who holds the higher ground is probably better off than the people on lower decks.
It's odd, then, that we pride ourselves so much on being this 360º 3D game and yet the majority of our popular levels are simple-minded corridor affairs with little dodging space above and below. You might as well be playing Doom. I mean, if you are taking zero advantage of the ability to move up and down in the mines, what's the point?
In Unreal Tournament, there is a heavy emphasis on Y-axis (technically Z-axis in their terms) in maps. If you look at most of the levels that came with it, and indeed the most popular homebrew maps, you'll see that the designs are very multi-tiered, with many layers of ramps and catwalks. In several ways, despite being a "ground pounder" game, they use the Y-axis a lot more than we do. The players themselves can't "fly," but it's nevertheless the case that threats can come from a broad range of places, not just straight ahead or to the left or right. Elevation is a huge factor and he who holds the higher ground is probably better off than the people on lower decks.
It's odd, then, that we pride ourselves so much on being this 360º 3D game and yet the majority of our popular levels are simple-minded corridor affairs with little dodging space above and below. You might as well be playing Doom. I mean, if you are taking zero advantage of the ability to move up and down in the mines, what's the point?
wrongKyouryuu wrote:I don't hate Spaz's maps, so much as I think they are overrated. The biggest problem is that there is very little application of the Y-axis.
In Unreal Tournament, there is a heavy emphasis on Y-axis (technically Z-axis in their terms) in maps. If you look at most of the levels that came with it, and indeed the most popular homebrew maps, you'll see that the designs are very multi-tiered, with many layers of ramps and catwalks. In several ways, despite being a "ground pounder" game, they use the Y-axis a lot more than we do. The players themselves can't "fly," but it's nevertheless the case that threats can come from a broad range of places, not just straight ahead or to the left or right. Elevation is a huge factor and he who holds the higher ground is probably better off than the people on lower decks.
It's odd, then, that we pride ourselves so much on being this 360º 3D game and yet the majority of our popular levels are simple-minded corridor affairs with little dodging space above and below. You might as well be playing Doom. I mean, if you are taking zero advantage of the ability to move up and down in the mines, what's the point?
X: left/right
Y: up/down
Z: front/rear (depth)
Will not save you the effort of actually working into it. You can ask questions in this forum though.
Y: up/down
Z: front/rear (depth)
Get some basic info here and then read about DLE-XP enhancements here (see the side menu).Edward wrote:I agree even levels in counterstrike can be more 3d than descent.
I have quite a few Ideas but cant implement them due to the fact that I have NO idea on how to use DLE XP and I haven't been able to find a tutorial anywhere.
Will not save you the effort of actually working into it. You can ask questions in this forum though.
This is an old argument. Spaz made a lot of levels. Some boxy and 2D, yet quite suitable for bad network conditions and mind games. Some of his levels have amazing 3D dogfighting areas. I've played Manes, Muses, and Maia recently with mostly broadband peeps, and the 3D dogfights have been intense and amazing.
Feces2 has a number good gameplay features. The energy bays are placed in highly exposed areas, good use of gratings, some weird angles and cuts to demand fancy flying, all in all it's a good level. I also like levels that feature a large well connected 3D area with many different tiers of approach, but this isn't that kind of level.
spud
Feces2 has a number good gameplay features. The energy bays are placed in highly exposed areas, good use of gratings, some weird angles and cuts to demand fancy flying, all in all it's a good level. I also like levels that feature a large well connected 3D area with many different tiers of approach, but this isn't that kind of level.
spud
