/-/S'pht-Translator-Active/-/
|
|
|
/-/S'pht-Translator-Active/-/ |
 | Re: The politics/philosphy of mapping | |
| Posted By: RyokoTK | Date: 8/16/06 2:18 p.m. |
| In Response To: Re: The politics/philosphy of mapping (Aaron Sikes) : How important is this to other people? Oh, man... *pre-emptively prepares flame shield* The idea that games should exist to send some kind of message utterly floors me. That's why they're games and not movies: they're meant to be enjoyed by the player. That's why, to me, Rubicon failed. Chris spent too much time and energy making his maps look great and fitting -- and they do -- but he totally forgot about how fucking annoying it is to be lost in maps like his for hours on end. When I make maps, the first thing that I concern myself with is enjoyment. Is this a fun map? If I don't have fun playing the map, it fails. If my testers say they don't have fun playing the map, then it's probably not a bad map. I do believe myself to be an intelligent and capable mapper, and definitely experienced enough to recognize the difference between good and bad by sight -- but nobody is infallible, and a mapper's "perfect vision" could just be retarded. If nobody has fun playing your levels, then they're probably not going to trudge through them just to actually see and enjoy your vision. Honestly, to me it's a shame that the Marathon community is so forgiving with the lack of entertainment in maps, just because there aren't any. Even Doom's community -- a game just as easy to map for as Marathon -- is much more harsh with the quality and entertainment in their maps, preferring ones that are fun rather than ones that look nice. Don't misinterpret me, though; it's not like I sell myself out. It's just that, if the level isn't fun, why play it? I'd rather watch a Rubicon movie than play the game.
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| Replies: |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
| Problems? Suggestions? Comments? Email maintainer@bungie.org Marathon's Story Forum is maintained with WebBBS 5.12. |