Here is what I want, now code my mod. But don't expect me to map for your mod. That's gonna work!


I played OUM today, you will like it I think. 

Yeah, no, sorry; I did read your post on the thread, er, half forgot!!

I think its very true what you say though. The thing with Quake2 and 4 which annoys me (as I believe you may have said, pretty much) is that the player is unable to move quickly enough IMHO. I mean you can say it's a multiplayer thing, but I like running around frantically and shooting things! The combat it what does it for me! Call me old fashioned... 

I designed a large landscape to manouvre the camera through, and it works perfekt, I can make demo's of it.
But I move backwards! Is the steering of the camera that difficult or do I have to read more zerstorer manuals?

ijed: same thing I had with phantompholly, I used the mod for its exploding barrels and moving water. But I had to add the earthquake trigger.

Why not make something like inside3D? All parts of the qc code in a questioning forum.
Like you search something like earthquake and you can find it like:

http://members.home.nl/gimli/Q1EarthQuak.htm 

That's kind of the thing I'm doing now; c+p the stuff I want into a progs dat. I'll probably continue with it after I finish each project, so new stuff will get added over time.

I've broken from traditionalism with a replaced weapon (axe) but I can't see anyone crying over that. 

good post, I think you are correct in how you draw the contrast between plot-driven objectives vs. the quake and doom style of more abstract gameplay. Mechanically they are the same, and it's really just window dressing that makes the difference between "plant an explosive charge on the anti-aircraft guns" in medal of honor and "press the button in the random room to open the door" in quake.

But, a couple of counter-points:

1. the heavily dressed-up objectives in quake2, moh, etc. are still fairly transparent. The biggest problem in a MoH type game is that the objectives are realistic and cool, but the mechanics around them, the ones that force you down the linear chain of events that the designer pre-scripted, are just annoying. Blowing up the AA-gun is a good plot device, but there's no reason that when you do that, suddenly a nearby explosion breaks a hole in a wall to allow you to continue -- and yet this is how they often end up being designed most of the time.

2. Quake and doom are abstract games, and the abstract objectives actually suit them well. To some extent, understanding too much about how the environment works or why it was built makes the world less mysterious. The push towards realism in level design may be cool for realistic games like sci-fi shooters, WWII games, etc, but in Quake it often makes the environments feel too literal.

Some exceptions -- most base maps can be fairly realistic and it works. Some medieval levels try to create realistic environments, and it works there too. But the cool thing about levels like The Wind Tunnels is that it is an alien, ancient, and only semi-comprehensible place that is not obvious in its purpose or inner workings. If you start explaining how it works, why the monsters are there, etc, you undermine the vagueness and inexplicability of the map's visual theme.

So I guess what i'm getting at is, in quake, you can go either direction, but I do not consider "realistic objectives" and "storyline" to be automatic improvements on any quake map. 

You meet a dying soldier in the Wind Tunnels - he croaks out some random phrase "Those flying things . . . " then dies. Lying next to him is an SNG.

That's pretty much the limit of what I meant I would want for Quake storyline, unless you're talking a full film type treatment. For example Nehahra's epic; which I enjoyed allot but wasn't so fond of when some small pieces of it arrived in between levels - the change of pace kind of jarred.

It makes no difference if the player listens or even notices the dying guy, he makes no impact on the progression, but the thing he does (if noticed) is heighten the the confusion and fear of the player, and give a reason why a futuristic weapon is in the place. Unless the bad sampling makes him sound like Darth Vader.

It's details like this that can really make a map, or episode, or even game. Nobody will pick up on all of them, but the overall feeling of completeness and quality is just there.

Ok, room 5 finished, onto room 6.

Or:

Dying soldier room finished, onto the room dingy cryogenic room.

I always try and have some sort of story in my head about what the place is. Most times its never obvious in the end result, but I find it also helps me to build, because I have more fun.

The design style of Quake and Doom is basically throw monsters at the player while they go to a number of areas, hitting switches or pressing buttons, until they reach the exit. Which is all fine and good. But when a mapper or group of breaks this mould into storyline tangents well then the project takes on another dimension - 'more than just another map'.

Operation Urth Magik
Contract Revoked
Zerstorer

Are the first that spring to mind. Varying qauntites of uninvasive storytelling that fit perfectly in the pace of the game, for me. 

Get in. 

You can imagine a scene which may spawn the idea for the level. Its how you manage to get it from your head into the level. And how much of what the player experiences comes from his/her imagination?

This is what I like about the abstract quality of Quake. The idea of monsters from other worlds/dimensions suddenly appearing. Where
did they come from? Where are their native environments? Or the creatures which have no origin, just pass from reality/dimension/world to reality/dimension/world for eternity.

Imagine how many places they could have been to?

Its like the idea of infinity. If there truly is such a thing as infinity then literally anything is possible. 

The vacuity and nihilsm draws the reader in, wanting to fill in the intentionally empty spaces. The history lesson embedded in At Mountains of Madness was one of my favourite bits of the whole.

Very craftily written, by intention or not. 

Wow. 

You didn't really cover things that I haven't put thought into, but you lay it out very clearly, and that makes it worth meditating on.

Sort of an inner mapper debate we have here; say that if we take it as a given that we are in the process of evolving the state of Quake mapping, so to speak, do we want to go the way of more pure game play, like the very mechanics oriented Metroid series, or do want to veer into more realistic or story oriented territory, like you would find in Half-Life, to give two excellent examples of very different game play approaches.

When I map for Quake, I find myself thinking about the story oriented approach, but I always end up with a more purist map in the end through refining game play. 

"but I always end up with a more purist map in the end through refining game play."

This is key, I think. I did mapping for Quake2 and tried to wrap a story around my level unit (called "Bad Seed"), but it always felt very tacked on and transparent.

Quake is about stripping away everything until you're left with the raw metal. It's about cool looking locations and minimal reasons for being there.

I don't want ALL games to be like that and I certainly like the story elements in modern games. But games from Quakes era don't really need them. 

Slave was never gonna be the peak of realism.
Run and gun! Bouncy bouncy!
The only modern game which I think comes close to Quake is UT3, which isnt really because its predominantly a multiplayer game. But it has the same sort of movement (fast) and similar combat in that respect, and also things like the layout and the fact that guns hover in mid-air before you pick them up. Although the mission statement is different.

But I think anything you can throw into a level which improves the immersion factor and captures the imagination of the player could be a good thing.

Quake is getting more realistic, with Quoth anyway - things like breakables and ladders are features of realism which have been added and can be used to make things *slightly* more realistic.

If you wanna talk about gameplay elements and Quake being surreal but having good combat then look at "Carved in Flesh" by Kona. Such a fantastic mod with fun fun fun gameplay. The set piece is fantastic, but very much surreal, but the monsters - you really get the feeling with that mod/map that you "never know what's coming round the next corner", because of the diversity of the monsters used in the map. But it's by no means realistic.

(one of my favorites for sure!) 

tried invein? 

The tack on objectives and scripted encounters often feel a little campy. But hey, if you think about it, games in total are a bit campy.
It's dancing on the line of getting the player to go with the flow and magic... And often being vague helps in this.

Quake could be a frantic experience where you just fight in a strange world and don't really have time to figure out how things work as you can just barely try and desperately push some buttons and try to make your way forward and survive. I find that these narrative elements like generator shutdowns etc kinda give the player too much control and can detract from the hopeless and mysterious atmosphere because of that... It's like when a horror flick loses the horror when the main character pulls his/her socks up and starts hunting the baddie.

Of course, quake is not just about the horror, it's about action too.
And there are a million ways to do things. And the monsters don't that much scare you anymore anyway as you've seen them a million times. And they're cartoony anyway.

What I'm trying to say perhaps that it could be a stylistic surreal cartoon instead of a b-movie trying to act as dramatic but ending up as camp. Cool places, monsters, cool and exhilarating gameplay moments and mechanics - but no campy plot.

You can see a lot of conflicting points in this post, it's just food for thought. 

...that has a Sin City rendering mode?

(it is)

Just after all of that talk of horror flicks and stylistic surreal cartoons! 

No, no, no.

If you do it at all, the plot has to come first. Like, "OK there is [device of doom] and player must take it out so we can send in troops." The device is preferrably big, inexplicable, and sitting in the center of the map in its own chamber. Then you build the map around that idea. Tagging it on never works. I'm playing Ground Zero atm and that (tagging on) is exactly what they did, and then they saw it was bad, and so they tossed more monsters in and those idiotic turrets. :-/ that's how it goes.

OUM btw is really good, but the story serves as a template more or less. It could go further, i.e. plot built into the map, with brushes actually. Visible. Blow-uppable preferably.

You guys will find this funny:

http://www.gamerevolution.com/oldsite/games/pc/action/quake_2_ground_zero.htm

the guy tells it like it is. In the end, it's about what you like though.

Ijed: The plot variant of the dying guy with the nailgun would be the following:

"Ah... those flying things."

"Listen, you must carry out my orders."

"Find the [device of doom] and neutralize it, so they can send in the troops."

It doesn't need to be more elaborate. Then when you blow up [device of doom] you get:

"Mission accomplished."

"Join our troops in [place where the exit is]."

That's all I'm asking for... I'm glad Quoth brings a number of possible plot devices, like monsters dropping keys. Imagine you have located [device of doom] but there is a [door, forcefield]. It could also be en route to the exit, of course. On a timer, even.

"Some monster probably has the key."

"Try the barracks."

So now you have some rudimentary info about this place you're in. The knowns:

There is a [device of doom]
There are barracks
There is [place where the exit is]
There is a monster with a key
There is a dying comrade
Your troops are waiting to come in
Optionally, you're on a timer etc.

There are still enough unknowns to keep it mysterious. Imagine those were the only facts about some military operation known to the public. There would be an uproar. A scandal. Some b0rked up commando operation. The unknowns:

What is this place
Who is the enemy
Why is this all b0rked up
Who is responsible (in the end, only you)

So the knowns really don't take away from the mystery. Not even in Quake 2. You just know the enemy is called "strogg" and you're in a fucked up military operation because apparently they started a war. You don't know that much about it all, really. You just know the place is peppered with dead comrades.

With Quoth, to return to the example, the Quakeguy would find an area that he could identify with barracks, and some monster [probably a tougher one] would drop the key. You could substitute barracks with [$control_room] and the key could be placed in a little receptacle.

It's not much really, it just neatens it up. So yeah, the overhead would still be low.

The coolened-up variant would be "collect 5 [$key] all over the map to access [$device_of_doom]". Like in Day of the Lords, where Glassman used the runes for this purpose. They were only used to open the path to the exit, though, so any plot was still missing. Since he used stock id1, he could not use external models for the keys, either. Using the runes has the benefit of not needing an inventory, since they are displayed in the status bar. It would get old fast, though. Hence the need for $key. 

he could not use external models for the keys, either.

You can have your models with a judicious use of brush models. I have been thinking about this sort of scenario for my next map: You put in an objective:

Quake (to player): When you kill the Hell Knight who betrayed me, bring me his decapitated head.

Action: Kill knight, Use a func_wall as a brush model for the decapitated head and set it to appear in the Hell Knight's Arena.

Action: Bring the head back to Quake's communique beacon. // Either kill a func_wall hiding the model, or the brush head model rises too quickly for the player to see it.

Quake (to player): You have done very well, grunt. Now I will ensure your death is quick and merciful. 

I started off in my above post trying to answer your well thought out one, and ended up rambling, as it goes.

Headthump, I did something similar to what you describe with a hub / Lazarus system in Quake2, the hub had a chapel to the war god, bringing back a commander head awarded you a (q2 savable) quad. Bringing back three heads got you a BFG. Shame I never finished it.

Also had an armoury where you collected the weapons - there were none in the maps. Completing more levels opened more caches in the armoury. 

I had this idea to develop a monster in the form of a basic 64x64 cube. It would been disguished as a stone and come alive and act as an endboss. By defeating it the same place it had been placed would become an new exit.
For so far I 've done well, although the lumpyness of the monster made me have my doubts. It took me quiet some time to construkt it. And now I have this wizz thing like...

Monster is in a separated place with the player. As the monster wakes it walks to the player leaving an open exit space, which is covered by a door after the monster spawns. The player attacks the monster untill it dies and opens the door to the exit.

Seems logical to target the door to the monster so it opens the door after its death. Point is that the monster is already targeted by a trigger_once in game to waken it.

So I targetted the door to 30 sec and then it opens. But sometimes the monster isn't killed yet and the player can escape.

Might have placed this on mapping help but as it is a monster using game potential (substituting a door, covered in stealth stand) it's here. 

The trigger targets the monster and the monster targets the door. I don't see the conflict there. 

Indeed, thats how I started. There's something more.

If I trigger the monster with the trigger_once it takes a delay of 4 sec Untill the monster gets out of the wall. So the same trigger I use for the monster I use for the door. This gives the monster time to move and the door (in fact the func_train) time to delay 4 sec.
Then it jumps up to the free coming space and waits 30sec.

But it has to move when the monster dies which is impredictable, The path_corner I can't trigger. So maybe a trigger_delay should work. 

fit very well in Q2 as the player has the role of a marine: soldiers do carry out orders. The original Quake was set in very open universe with all possibilities left open for interpretation; players could let run their phantasy free. One result is that you have far more fan-art, fan-stories etc. in Quake than in Q2.
Players are not and can�t be biased about that aspect, everyone is able to put in their own thoughts, and it all fits.

Personally, I�m always a little annoyed about �center screen messages� in newer Quake maps: they are taking away that aspect of �something undefined� away from me and kill my immersion, or even worse, mappers giving me too much personal input (smart comments or joking with the player).
Except for speedmaps :)
Though in the id maps, I can accept them on the other side(lol?), maybe because seeing that the concept was also quite new at the time in fps games. Otherwise, as someone who has played alot of Quake maps, I�d prefer them to be only there if absolutely necessary for gameplay, i.e. a warning that a bridge might break while standing above lava (indeed screwing with the player�s mind is gameplay).

Enter Half-life: players had to find out everything on their own, no preset objectives, no center messages, one could spend days in those maps and it�d be ok; that was a very clever move to give the game a significant amount of depth, while the gameplay was exactly like Q2.
If it weren�t for that and the immersive and well unfolded story, HL would have been just another Q2 clone.

My conclusion: in today�s developed gaming culture where alot of people play/have played fps games, objectives are ok to achieve a certain setting/theme/immersion, but are not neccessary, as nothing in terms of gameplay mechanic has changed since DooM/Quake. 

learn to appreciate it: hardcore secrets, monsters and weapons. Those turrest are annoying, but it was a (succesful) attempt to give Q2�s gameplay more profile: player is no longer superman who bunnyhops through the maps with ten weapons and tons of ammo on his back (as it still was with Q2).

I see Q2 as id�s vision of a �quakey� reality fps at the time (I remember reading a quote by John Carmack where he stated he was slightly unsatisfied with players bouncing at 2000 mph through maps). Minimalistic, as is id�s style, but with everything it needs to make it believable:

- objectives: (see last post)

- very futuristic/techy/science-fiction sounds, one of the game�s best done aspects

- metallic, tank-like enemies; I had always the feeling to �wear down� monsters in Q2, and not gibbing/smearing them onto the walls like in Quake. That is a more soldier/tactical approach: defeat their defences, cover the flanks etc.

In default Q2, the Medics were too easy. Remember the Doom Archvile, and how much terror it could inflict on the mind of players ? GZ features several battles against the Medic Commanders that are similar: they teleport stuff in to no end, players are either quick or dead quickly. That is true quakyness imo.

And also the final boss: a badass that�s able to teleport in lower ranked minions; maybe nothing new, but well done and the increased challenge was quite fitting for a 2nd missionpack of a game. 

I don't want ALL games to be like that and I certainly like the story elements in modern games. But games from Quakes era don't really need them.

I don't feel you have to bash someone over the head with a story and mash it down their throat, as most modern games do, but that gameplay and enviroments can tell a deep story that the player can discover and claim 'their own'. I feel that approach is more rewarding to all parties, and completely within the scope of Quake, or any type of game.

A dead Quake Marine on the ground tells a potent story, especially if whatever killed him is right around the corner. After Biff released his recent SP map, I suggested to him that he could've up'd the 'storyline' a little if one of the crates you started near was opened on the side you start on, explaining how you may have snuck into the particular base. Placing monsters in a room all facing toward an altar of demonic power tells a story. All these sorts of small things build up, and add richness to the experiance without removing anything that makes Quake fundimentally enjoyable.

A great atmospheric effect can also tell story. Can't remember the map, and think it was likely an oversight of the mapper, but it started in a large empty room. and there was NO ambient sound. none. It increased the feeling of lonelyness in the map, and made it all the more suprising when all of a sudden monsters appeared. A commonly used atmospheric effect is blinking lights, but anything broken can be used to make the player question, if only in the back of their mind, 'I wonder how that happened?'

One of Portal's great story telling aspects is when all of a sudden the player finds themselves on their own after the game having basically shown them what to do thus far. That's not so hard as you may think, something as simple as following a sign on a wall pointing to where the silver key is, only for it to disappear (ala Vaults of Zim) or otherwise not be where it SHOULD be, and now the player must strike out on their own to get it.

In short, story doesn't need to be simply written in a .txt file as the explaination of the level, not does it have to be as heavy handed as a machinima with fancy explosions. But just the smallest details can tell big and powerful storys if used correctly and with style, and don't have to steal away any of the Quakeiness of Quake.