Jump to content

Given To Fly

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Given To Fly


    It all comes down to risk versus reward. To rephrase a point I made earlier, further empowering power weapons without proper balancing in place creates overpowered scenarios. The same applies to vehicles and vehicle-specific areas, and for those who may have misinterpreted, I'm referencing the open, rolling hills of Blood Gulch and Standoff when I use the term "traditional vehicle-specific area design". There is a distinction between areas and routes. It's all about balance. Moves and counter-moves.


    Just to clear things up,


    I in no way was suggesting you simply make no-man's land areas for vehicles to roam free. I understand pathing and believe firmly vehicles should have their own specific pathing. (Vehicle specific areas) 


    Think, Rat's Nest, not Blood Gulch.

    • Upvote (+1) 2

  2. Vehicle-specific areas are fundamentally flawed because they greatly empower vehicle pilots while severely disempowering infantry


    This statement itself is fundamentally flawed. Allowing players to pilot a vehicle in an undesirable environment for the vehicle specific mechanics is either one of two things. The first of which being inadequate map design, and the second being poor vehicle choice, if any. Designing vehicle specific areas are what makes vehicles themselves "power weapons." Allowing the vehicles to be used to their full potential. Placing vehicles on a map without proper play space essentially nerfs them to the point of them not being enjoyable or practical.


    Using your logic would be the same as placing a sniper rifle on "Chiron TL-34." It is the worst possible environment for a long range weapon, but using the same logic, placing it on a map with long sight lines only makes the weapon overpowered. That is an absolutely silly way of looking at map design and suggest you rethink your strategy.


    I don't expect you to take anything out of what I'm saying as you are clearly decided in your ways. Best of luck on Bad Blood 2.

    • Upvote (+1) 2

  3. You're design seemed so distorted and scaled differently to the point of where I wouldn't even refer to it as a loose inspiration.



    In regards to your concern about little to no vehicle-infantry interaction, my original vision was designed to enable the exact opposite. No part of the map was safe in my original vision; light vehicles can go anywhere infantry can go, creating huge movement incentive and a huge movement/combat skill gap for both vehicles and infantry by maximizing interaction between the two. Vehicles and infantry interacted on every level of every route and structure on my original vision of the design, as every part of the map was also a core part of the vehicle circuit. 


    I assume you are referring to ghosts and mongooses. Allowing these "light" vehicles access to all parts of the map doesn't mean they will function well. They need room to stretch and ultimately thrive in vehicle specific areas. For instance, on Halo 4's Complex, you could drive a ghost into the central window room, if taken the right paths. This was possible but not ideal. When incorporating vehicles onto maps, you need to think about how they will move around and how vulnerable the driver becomes with each position. Allowing light vehicles to scale player traversable structures may create an illusion that nowhere is safe, but in turn generates bad flow, wasted vehicles, or certain death. Just make sure that if you do implement light vehicles that you design specific areas for them before placing them, and not just designing larger walkways and placing down a ghost after the fact.

    • Upvote (+1) 1

  4. Although your design is essentially "Bad Blood 2" and shares zero design similarities to Longbow, I can't help but wonder which would play better.

    343 changed the map ENTIRELY because you didn't do what they asked for. Instead of reshaping Longbow to make it function better, you simply remade your H2A map. Now Longbow was never a good map to begin with but had potential nonetheless. Recurve in its current state has a multitude of problems. Jumps, weapons, spawns, layout, vehicle play room, and the list goes on. That is 343's fault, (mostly) but we are all familiar with their skills at making forge maps. If you would have actually tried to improve Longbow we would not be stuck with the trainwreck they gave us.


    Your design looks like a slightly improved Bad Blood, but is hard to tell through images. I know you'll remake it anyway so that is just a matter of time. Attempting to judge the map off the design, it looks like there would be little to no vehicle-player interaction. It is not something required in BTB, but is almost expected. If you did plan on making vehicles part of it I would recommend switching up the bottom level with natural terrain or something. BB H2A suffered from restrictive and flat ghost gameplay. I am looking forward to your (original vision) of Recurve, despite it having nothing to do with Longbow.

    • Upvote (+1) 4

  5. It is hard to say exactly what we want because there is so much we don't know about, but personally I would like to see a ton of "scenery" pieces. Respective to each theme. Halo 3 had barrels, fence walls, trucks, signs, and more stuff that helped set an environment. I would adore seeing an increased scenery menu like this to make maps feel even more believable. Covenant and forerunner scenery is something we need especially.

  6. Is it confirmed then that even in custom games lobby we will not have any gametypes other than slayer, CTF, strongholds and breakout?

    If so, Halo 5 is essentially worthless without an internet connection.


    Why is this terrible strategy of releasing content becoming a trend? Attempts to sustain a continuous population throughout the game's lifespan? Cause H1, H2, H3, and HR totally would have failed without it... oh wait.

  7. 343 is not going to remove sprint from Halo. It has become a staple whether everyone likes it or not.

    In H5 they made a small step forward with the shield regen thing, but it doesn't solve the problem.

    I always thought that if they really need a method to increase speed periodically, remove sprint all together but keep thruster packs in. It would provide a method of keeping things "fast paced."  This is just a solution to meet somewhere in the middle between OG Halo players and 343's vision.

    In a perfect world we would have barebones Halo with improved mechanics and graphics, but it seems unlikely for the game to revert back to it's earlier form completely.

  8. "The intuitive expert will be less sure of their answers, while incompetent people will be very sure of their (wrong) answers."


    This stood out to me specifically. I agree with this statement for the most part, in fact I have seen it happen. Many times people will recieve feedback on their map and discredit it because they are incompetent. They try to explain why their creation or section works, and can get their point across without going into massive explanation. I'll use my own map for example. On my map "Olympus", I was told to remove railings from the front of the tower (see picture below) because they allowed for too much cover in that spot creating an over-powered-position.




    However, removing those railings would prove to be disastrous. The railings are hollow so people up on that balcany are still easily seen and shot at. In fact the whole reason I put them there was to block LOS from the balcany point of view. In game standing up there you are not able to see the bottom half of your field of vision because the railing is in the way. This way people can stand up on balcany, look out into the horizon but the power of the position is so limited because anyone near the tower or underneath that spot can shoot the person and not be seen as easily. The railings balanced out the position. Being told they needed to be removed was just an incompetent opinion from a couple newer forgers. I however was certain in my decision to keep them. I did test the option to have them gone, and the result was that not a single person wanted to be up on that balcany. (a major position on the map) and the same people who told me to remove them said "It's SO much better!" but the problem was that nobody went there. It became unused space, so I kept the railings and the map balanced out as a result. The point I'm trying to make is that being certain of something does not necessarily mean you need to question it. It is a good thing to worry about whether something works, but if you weigh out the possibilities and prove you are making the right decision, being certain is the most rewarding feeling you can experience.


    Now take for example MultiLockOn's "Trinity." When he first showed me the concept idea for the map, I was confused. As he got further and further into production the layout became apparent. It was unlike any map I had been seeing made by developers or forgers in a good number of years. I was skeptical to say the least, but as we began to test the map and iron out the wrinkles, I noticed more and more there was something special about he map. It replicated map design from Halo CE more so than any other forge map I had seen. Was the map perfect? No. No map is, be it a dev map or community map. There are always things to improve on. Another reason it was not well recieved was that it was built in the wrong engine. However through explanation, Multi was able to justify his designs, and more people began to understand what exactly made it work.


    I enjoyed the iceberg mentality concept, and it makes sense, but I don't believe it applies to every person or situation. It is absolutely reasonable for professional players to both instinctually know good map design, and verbally explain it without being asked specific pieces of it.

  9. I disagree. I think they know but don't necessarily know how to explain it without the proper questions. Once you ask the correct question then their answers become golden.

    If they could not explain without specific questions, then they do not truely know. I feel as though asking specific questions is like spoon feeding them answers to obvious questions.

  10. It makes much more sense for forgers to explain better map design over professional players. Why? Simple.

    Forgers are able to, and have been through, trial and error. There are so many variables in creating maps I fear that nobody here is actually thinking about the smaller things. Layout is one thing, but we have to take into consideration lengths of path ways, degrees of inclines, and points of interest. There are many other things as well. The point I'm trying to get at is that forgers don't deal with numbers exclusively (OG forgers). Ignoring developers for a second let's examine forgers vs players. Players know how to react well in an environment, but they are limited only to what they are used to. This could be the root of all evil in the poor map quality in recent titles. It is well known that 343 has pros provide feedback for their maps. Forgers on the otherhand, have that ability to create anything and use a gut feeling of whether something works or not. They are allowed to use other maps as inspiration, but ultimately can create something very unique that a pro would have never imagined playing on, and make it great. Forgers do not need to stick to 30 degree inclines in maps, or to have 2 distinct tower bases and side bases (Midship formula). Now I'm not insinuating all forgers make better designers, but the ones who truely understand how maps succeed, and pour their hearts into their designs will always pull ahead of current pro players and developers alike, in my book.

    • Upvote (+1) 1

  11. Did you read my post?


    It wasn't the tools. It was the knowledge, experience, and attitudes.


    I would have to say there are forgers out there who have come to undertand map design for multiple first person shooters exceptionally well. Especially for Halo. It is a matter of playing varieties of maps as well as trial and error. MultiLockOn has been forging as long as I have, and recently he has recieved praise for his map: Trinity. However it did not start that way. Many thought there was too much height variation, unusual pathing, strange functions, and bad weapon selection. After explaing why his map replicated Halo CE fluidity to players in the community who mainly got involved during Reach, people began to reverse their thinking. Modern players have lost touch of what was making maps iconic. Modern devs are not taking these things into account, or rather, are not allowed. I can't whole-heartedly blame devs themselves for everything as I'm sure the company most likely wants flatter maps to level out skill gap. Halo specifically has gone down a path to cater too heavily to average gamers and not those dedicated to the series. I think forge is the perfect outlet for dedicated community members to replicate the gameplay style they love. I would obviously prefer an editor, but to actually craft a map that both looks good and plays good takes more skill than credit given. Also not everyone has access or patience for these programs. It is worlds easier to use forge, but then again not everyone is trying to be a map developer. Some simply wish to make good maps to run customs on. Simply saying you need degrees to make maps is foolish.

  12. You both are fantastic helps on the subject. I totally agree that actually making real maps for a resume is an immense help on making an impression. I also like the advice of designing for other games as well. Not only would it help show diversity in your skills, but it could lead to a job at another company which if desired could be a stepping stone to 343, Bungie, or whatever you want. I've never even thought about Halo PC editor so I'll definitely check that out. I recently downloaded Unreal 4, but have not had time to experiment. Same with Maya.


    This forum without a doubt has the most logical and dedicated community. I'm glad I can get well thought out responses.

  13. No, you're really reaching here. I'm saying to ask the general population of Halo players. You want to specifically ask those who have a clear bias. I know why you mentioned forgers but that wouldn't stop it from suffering from selection bias.



    What difference does the players knowing the maps make? From an actual quality perspective? Not much. However, from a game design standpoint it's very meaningful. It's especially meaningful when the game in question is inherently competitive.


    You've progressively spiraled downhill in your argument.

    If you ask any random player what their favorite map is they will name a developer map. This is because forge maps are not widely distributed throughout the entire Halo community. They aren't forced on us like dev maps. In fact if you ask people who played reach extensively, "what is your favorite Reach map?" you will get answers that include "The cage." A forge map. why is that relevant? because it was an on disc map. Everyone had access to it, whether you're a vet, or its your first game. Your argument collapses on itself. Having more developer maps because of the removal of forge is the worst possible solution. You think it will give us a better selection of maps even though almost everyone here has proven most dev maps are subjectively bad. But if we have a general selection of dev maps in addition to millions of custom created maps, what are you even arguing? Forge gives us an abundance of maps. Limitless supply. The only real problem is that not everybody will experience the best maps. However if they were placed into matchmaking more often, people would play them more and find them more enjoyable solutions to a small map library.

    • Upvote (+1) 2

  14. Let's take a second here.


    It seems as though you are pretty focused on the negative aspects Multi mentioned about Lockout. I don't understand why you're fixated on that. He explained that particular map has an extremely different playstyle than other maps, specifically Damnation. If you understand Lockouts playstyle, then you understand it is bad. The majority of the map is not fully utilized every game, there are strange POV sight lines, and tactical jumps that are so insane it breaks the intended flow of the map. However, it is all these flaws that gives the map such a nostalgic love. Players love these flaws because it requires map knowledge. You have to have played the map repeatedly in order to fully grasp all the things that allow you to control the map and win the match. This leads into "fully understanding the map on the first match." There is no reason you should have to fully understand the map on your first play through. In fact I would consider that a bad thing. It means your map is very simplistic, and most likely does not have any depth. A vanilla map. This leads to less replay value because it means there is nothing about the map that promotes a different strategy. This is the biggest problem in the forge community. People are over-simplifying their maps to be a "catch-all" map that anyone can play. This is the reason many people like you consider forge maps to be jokes. Halo 3 was the most iconic period for forge because people pushed the envelope. Many think reach was the pinnacle but that is a common mistake. In Reach people became dependent on rotation snap, coordinates, and in Halo 4 even magnets. These are great tools for beginners to better grasp map making, but it is something that should be progressively dropped the better you become. Those tools are crutches that people depend on far too much, especially when we've had the same forge pieces since 2010. "Free handing" your maps allows you to use items on different degrees and places you simply cannot do on rotation snap and coordinates. You're more likely to create something people have never seen. Going back to Halo 3, this is clear. Forge maps were the most iconic for this reason alone. Anyone in the forge community who has been invested from the beginning, can clearly remember specific maps from H3 forge and how to play them. This is because creativity was at its peak. you were forced to work and think about your map and pieces. People used pieces in different ways rather than using doors as doors, or walls as walls. You could play a map and see structures and ask "how did you make that?" which does not happen today. Saying people outside the forge community do not care about forge maps is one of the worst opinions I have ever heard. I have played forge maps that play better than well over half of developer maps. Forge creations were appreciated so much in H3 and Reach. By everyone. That is why tons of community created maps were placed into matchmaking. Because they worked. They were different.


    MultiLockOn's video is not telling you how to make maps, in fact it is the polar opposite. He is saying design maps how you think maps should be. Each Halo game gets progressively worse from a forge community standpoint. Forgers have become arrogant. Personally I have been forging since day one, and recently have gotten criticism from forgers who got into the scene in Halo 4. I've been told to completely re-design large sections of my maps, without explaining how to make them work better first. Simply telling me to do better... Having been so invested in the game and map making process that is the most offensive thing you can tell me. Newer forgers think they're all Jr. developers essentially. That attitude needs to be dropped immediately. In Halo 3 I built a map that generated a quarter million downloads. That is insane, but if I were to remake that map nowadays it would be considered a joke.


    I'm hoping Halo 5 is the turning point in this terrible mind set. Hopefully we receive all new pieces forcing people to be creative once again. Chances are that if you started forging in Halo reach onward, you have not changed your forging style much at all since 2010. We need to take in account all the points Multi made in this video. Only then will forge be great again, the community will grow, and forge maps will become more relevant than ever before.

    • Upvote (+1) 1

  15. You really think forge should return to its day one edition Cadillac? ONLY swapping weapons, spawns, and scenery pieces?

    That is a fantastic way to kill the customs community. MultiLockOn is absolutely right, forge evolving is the reason Halo 3 lasted so long, and still has a decent sized community on the 360.

    If Halo dumbed down forge, about half the game's population would vanish. I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Custom games are the life-blood of Halo. Between the mini games and endless supply of maps, people have so many reasons to keep playing the game. That is one reason why Halo games release every 3 years, they have an endless supply of content that is all free to play, and creative.

    The reason franchises like Call of Duty and Assasin's Creed release games every year is because they need to keep things fresh and new. Halo's custom community replenishes the game with fresh content daily and keeps the game fun and interesting. (Replay Value.)


    I understand you believe that Halo games have focused more on forge maps than dev maps, but this is entirely untrue. The only game this is believable for is Reach. Halo 3 and 4 did not focus on forge maps. They simply gave people the option to create their own maps, with great tools.

    Forge has a limitless amount of potential. You just need to be able to see the beauty in the pieces we have, use them in different ways, and think of creative structures. In fact, I have been loading up Halo 3's forge this last week and am still thinking of new things to make after forging in the games prime 3 years.


    As for developer maps, I agree. The more the better. HOWEVER, removing forge and asking for more dev maps is poppycock. You must love the idea of "Remix" maps, which by the way is TERRIBLE. I absoluetly loved Truth in the beta, but I thought that Regret played terrible. I enjoyed Eden, but wasn't a fan of Empire.

    I think developer maps should be well designed and tested more so. But just because it is a dev map, doesn't mean it is good. Do you remember "Abandoned?" I would gladly accept any forge map over that dev "map."


    Forge takes practice, and it is completely possible to create unique looking and playing maps that can function better than previous dev maps. They are a rare breed, but they exist.

    • Upvote (+1) 6
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.