 | Re: The politics/philosphy of mapping |
| Posted By: Forrest of B.org | Date: 8/17/06 9:29 a.m. |
| In Response To: Re: The politics/philosphy of mapping (Aaron Sikes)
: I guess this is where I stand as well. Nobody can be/should be expected to
: make everybody happy. And with the amount of effort that goes into making
: a single level, we might well argue that the designer's preferences should
: be given full sway. If people don't like a map, so be it. Yet more reason,
: however, for collaboration on scenario development. Inevitably, any
: mapmaker's style can get to be tiresome for some people, if only for
: reasons of predicatability. Consitency is nice, but variety keeps things
: alive.
When work on Eternal X began, I was hoping to have one mapmaker assigned to each texture set, so each type of environment would have it's own distinctive feel (since each texture set is a completely different environment build by a different civilization, as opposed to just "different parts of Lh'owon" as M2/Infinity have).
That hasn't really worked out, since my original group of mapmakers has changed (and I only really had 4 to begin with), but there's still some strong correlation. Most of the Human and Jjaro levels are Don's (though Goran did the new Inti Station levels), most of the S'pht and Pfhor levels are Andreas' and Goran's (Goran more the Pfhor levels than S'pht; and Don made a couple prominent Pfhor levels as well), and the Forerunner levels are looking likely to be about an even split between Adam and Don with some work from Andreas.
|
