Necros, all i want to do is to lift a vermis out of an area the player visited earlier.
Sorry but i�m really desperate about it, attaching it to moving entities don�t work.
Any help would be very appreciated, maybe an example map or sth.

Thank you! 

you make a func_rotate_train and set it up as usual, but instead of making a rotate_object and doing a target->targetname to it, you do the target->targetname to the vermis.
the func_rotate_train will move the vermis around. 

Quark is a bitch you dont want to **** with.
thanks. 

Consistent problem of mine with mapping (for any game really) is being able to create some nice looking rooms/areas, and having no idea what to do with them next; any attempt at layout becomes quickly stale, flat and linear - simply uninteresting. I've spent a long time examining existing maps, offical and custom, what makes them tick and why they have nice layouts with interesting flow; but I still have trouble doing the same myself despite having ideas for gameplay and themes etc.

Any pointers? 

Some layout ideas:

Layers: Take your room and slice it into layers and then create height differences based on the layers. Once you are happy with the height difference connect with stairs/lifts.

Purpose: Design each space with a theme and a purpose. Plan out the layout based on what function or purpose the room is going to have. This will often dictate height and shape considerations.

Texture: Use textures to define shapes, like lego panels. Cut and slice the brushwork based on texture lines, works best for industrial stuff.

Intersection: Take two spaces at different heights and mash them together to form a combined version. The intersecting area will be perfect for letting players see the next space and where they are going. Also good for forcing transitions between architectural styles.

Monster: Create a space specific for a monster which gives the monster a crazy good advantage over anything else in the room. Always allow the player a chance to see the room beforehand so that the only surprise is the monster not room + monster.

Humans: Define the space by door and window dimensions. Will give a location a realistic sense of volume and create a natural foot movement through a room. 

draw on graph paper what kind of layout or idea you have. Better to run out of ideas on paper than to 2 weeks in the editor, you can quickly flesh out your layout before you get hit with the dreaded mappers block.

Don't just draw the overhead layout! Draw a front view, this helps especially if you are making a castle or base that you have to get into.

Make a brush palette! Spend some making various brushes, columns, walls and general themes you want to incorporate. Not only will this save time but also help to maintain a cohesive theme!
I usually make various different brushes with different texture combinations too to see what fits nice.

Inter-connectivity, no-one wants to fight on a map that has no z-axis, make good use of different floor heights, stairways, walkways, overhead and underfoot platforms and bridges. Think of a snake eating itself or the infinity symbol, making your level go back into rooms that you have already visited (perhaps at different heights) will allow you to increase gameplay without increasing workload.

Lighting, make sure your lighting is interesting. No flat-lighting, make use of beams and architecture to cast interesting shadows. Plus a good way to help players not get too lost in your map is to give visual lighting cues, Portal 1 and 2 use this technique a lot!

Take a break from your map! Sometimes I will take a few days abstinence from mapping, sometimes I will have a nap for a bit (some of my best ideas come from that moment just as you're going to sleep)... it'll give fresh perspective! 

Does anyone actually do that stuff? I mean, I know that's the advice that gets given every single time ... draw it out on paper, plan every route, etc. I have never done that in my entire game dev career. Ever. 

I suppose I could scan my graph paper book for you if you need evidence. ;) 

Personally I gave up using graph paper for level layouts years ago. I believe 2D visual devices = 2D maps. If you want 3D level sketch the route in a 3D editor with blocks and ramps. You can always carve up the shapes later for textures.

One thing I find useful is imagine the flow of your level first. Think of the map as a roller coaster with high and low points. Nobody wants to play constant combat maps, allow for negative space. If you don't have empty spaces you cannot create crescendo gameplay moments because the combat intensity is a flat line. 

I pre-plan layout with a flow chart (bubbles connected by lines.) Each bubble is a space with a unique identity, defined either by the gameplay i want in there or the setpiece/visual idea i have.

For the contents of the bubble I draw isometric sketches of the room or area. Sometimes a top-down floorplan is cool too, but that lends itself to 2D rooms so it's better to draw isometric or draw both plan view + elevation view. I usually have too many bubbles and cut some of them during development.

My oldest maps were grown organically with no plan, but both Antediluvian and Rub2m2 were both built using the flowchart method. My professional levels have also been built this way -- with the exception of DM maps since they're so tightly integrated. For those I draw the entire map as one bubble so the isometric sketches include the entire map.

For pro maps I take the next step of blocking out the entire level with rough shapes first before detailing anything. For home-built levels I still do the entire room up to final quality before moving on. 

Yeah, we do the block out thing which is a clear win since moving a few BSP blocks around is a hell of a lot faster than a bunch of meshes and volumes. But the whole sketching it out first thing ... no, never done it.

I was just curious because it seems like such a time sink. I can't imagine it being faster than just getting in the editor and throwing blocking brushes around. 

For me, without hand-drawn sketches, I don't know what I'm building. I guess it depends on the individual, it sounds like you use the brush editor to do your "sketch." 

love to see an example or two of your sketches from Rubicon 2 or Ant. 

Yeah, I just think better in 3D. I'm very visual so I can feel an area better if I can see it in front of me ... By the time I sketch out a version, I could have blocked out 3 versions in that same amount of time. :) 

I am terrible. I'm getting better, but I tend to just build the layout in the editor, almost completely linearly. I also do most detailing as I go. I can totally see the benefit of drawing pics and sketching layouts beforehand though. 

 

I pre-plan layout with a flow chart (bubbles connected by lines.)

A lot of games companies do that method. Some call them 'action bubble', 'encounter' or 'scenario' they are a very good way of grouping a chunk of gameplay together.

it's better to draw isometric or draw both plan view + elevation view

Lots of design tests still expect Level Designers to be able to do this at interviews on whiteboards or for written tests. Being able to represent an encounter space isometrically is a good skill to have, but this is different to 2D floor plans. 

Is important yeah, I usually draw concentric rings somewhere and label what I want to happen in each loop.

When I sketch stuff its usually something that'll tie the level together, like a light fitting, pillar, bunch of crates or something.

Sock's got a good list there, I'd also add:

Keystone Texture
Choose a single texture, then base the entire level around it. Make a few rules for yourself, some examples:
Use the keystone texture in every room
Use the Keystone Texture only on vertical Trims
What texture you use is obviously important, but in various ways - slime is going to be a different challenge to a flat metal without detail, for example.

If you're feeling particularly adventurous try choosing it randomly.

Tilt
This is a rescue thing more than anything. Once you've built your 'uninspired' level, rotate it 15 degees on the ZX or ZY axis.

Difficult to get it on grid, but I guarantee you'll have something interesting afterwards.

Story
Choose a series of events and build seperate areas for each one. 'A bunch of marines crash in a ship into a netherworld castle. They fight their way out of the crash site and reach a deactivated slipgate. They then fight their way across the castle to a key but are mostly slaughtered trying to reach a missing gizmo to reactivate the gate. The lone survivor is killed by some big monster.'

Arm up each of those instances as a set-piece scene, then link them up and bang a start point in there for the player (who isn't the lone survivor). You could try showing them to the player in sequence, but it's a pain in the balls to get right. Just the act of you telling the story for yourself will give the level a much stronger sense of place. 

I never said I just draw the plan, I also draw the outside or the look/feel of the area too... having a plan allows me to play with ideas without having to lay down brushes (which for me is really the time sink part, plus I find if hate an idea then I'd rather hate it at the sketch phase than have to redo a bunch of brushes)..
Having the plan view *and* the profile view, plus my pre-made brush prefabs allows some much nicer workflow and consistency.

I'm really surprised that some of the great mappers here just work in the editor. Like RickyT, StarkMon was a pretty beastly map... I can't imagine trying to make such a complex map without something on paper.

I guess I draw much quicker than I map, but I have been drawing for about 20 years longer than I have been mapping. ;) 

i draw nothing. maybe this hurts my design process a little in that there is less context and cohesion, but i'm too impatient for that kind of thing. if i'm sitting down to make a map, it's because i already have an idea in my head and i want to start building it right away. 

I can't draw for shit, so when I do draw it tends to be 2d - isometric sketches of even rudimentary quality aren't really in my purview...
So i'm pretty Necros style, I guess... Except, you know, I don't actually finish my maps.

Even as a student I only end up pulling my act together because of extrinsic motivation (aka deadline).
Hence only speedmaps being produced, I suppose. 

On personal projects, I never preplan. I'm a big believer in the Cerny Method in game design, where you do lots of preproduction and iteration until you have something like a single level that is shipable that you are happy with, and then enter production from that point. For me as a level designer, that fits how I work as well, I make 1 fully detailed area and theme, generally something like a central hub, and then plan from there.

I also really like reusing spaces. I think it helps give a sense of place to enter leave and return to an area several times. It takes a little bit of thought how to connect things, but I think it's worth it in maximizing how much gameplay you get from a space. The trick can be to make sure it feels natural.

scampsp1 is a good example, the room I made first (with the spiral stairs and angled walkways and gold key door) I basically stuck a bunch of doors at what I felt were natural places, and then thought 'how would I get from that door to that door', and just mentally decided between a few different options until I had a clear plan.


At Raven, I had to draw layouts or use sketchup drawings and write documents of a plan for the level (based from a paragraph blurb for the level from the master Design Document) and then present it to design / art / project leads who would ok or modify the plan. Honestly hated these, often they would be a giant waste of time because sometimes you would get blindsided by random new plans for your level that were decided in other meetings... or the art lead would just randomly decide that some cool centerpiece would need to happen that you had no plan for... or some crazy storyline encounter would be decided on the fly... yattta yatta yattta... and then once you built the map, you'd go through much the same process and likely have to revise several times again anyway! 

Actually that's one of the larger stumbling blocks for me as experience has shown that the original plan for a level is almost never how it actually ships - so why bother? Get something going quickly because you're going to throw it away anyway. It's just how it works... Iteration will eventually result in a fun level. 

Is the best way - start by slapping down big coarse chunky areas, move them around, refine and iterate. Eventually you'll end up with something good.

Nothing worse than spending ages drawing something out on paper then realising it doesn't work when you've built it. 

At college!

(Rapid Application Dev. for anyone who isn't familiar).

I guess I use the dated Waterfall methodology.

Should be using an Agile methodology....