Why make maps on the Natural Selection 2 engine? Here is why!

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=~ZOMG;22551081]You don't get it free with the game?

What the hell?[/QUOTE]

Of coarse the SDK comes free with the game. I think he is referring to the game itself. You can pre-order the game for $30 and you get instant access to the SDK that they update from time to time with fixes, new entities, and features.

The greatest thing Hammer has over the Spark editor is the incredible I/O system. With Source mapping, you can create incredibly unique maps with cools functions, without touching code.

[~ZOMG]

Oh, my bad.

[robmaister12]

NS2 Editor < Source SDK < UDK

[editline]02:44AM[/editline]

also, subtractive mapping < additive mapping

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=robmaister12;22551218]NS2 Editor < Source SDK < UDK

[editline]02:44AM[/editline]

also, subtractive mapping < additive mapping[/QUOTE]

Perhaps I've boasted NS2 editor to the point that I give people the impression that I think it's better than Source SDK. I listed some of the features of NS2 that are relieving to use after using Source for so long.

I agree with you on NS2 SDK < Source SDK < UDK. I speak more for myself when I say all of NS2's tools are designed much better for people who map alone or in very small teams of 2 to 4 perhaps. I have heard you say yourself that you need a bit larger team, about 5+ if I guess to really get things done with UDK.

I've never completely understood subtractive style level design.

[IronPhoenix]

For all those saying that is this the gmod mapping section...it's not. This forum is designed for source, and as ns2 is heavily based off the source engine, there should be no issues with posting it here.

We are a rogue section...so lets act like it!

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;22552469]For all those saying that is this the gmod mapping section...it's not. This forum is designed for source, and as ns2 is heavily based off the source engine, there should be no issues with posting it here.

We are a rogue section...so lets act like it![/QUOTE]

I don't agree with you actually. It is for the most part a garrysmod/source mapping section.

How I accessed posting the thread in this section was basically coming to the conclusion that I would find nobody who was interested in the topic because there are not many developers and/or mappers in the general games section. You can look at it in the sense that the general games section is too general and the mapping section is too specific.

We need a general mapping section for discussion like this, because I can't talk about this stuff to people in general games.

[Firegod522]

To clear up what I said earlier.

If I got the Spark Editor for free without actually buying the game to try out (Such as a free trial or something). I would mess around in it. But since I have to buy the game, before I try it. I'm not going to buy the game for a tool...

[ouch-that-hurts]

Natural selection was one of the greatest half life mods ever, The gameplay was so different from what i was used to at the time (CS,DOD,TFC) having to stay together in small teams and build resource points and other equipment to secure the map. Looking out for skulks jumping out vents or hiding on roofs cloaked laughing before they pounce, Lerks swooping down spraying toxic gas keeping you distracted while a fade rips apart one of your team mates. Not to mention the fear of hearing one of your team mates shouting ONOS!!! and everyone running in different directions.

Yep im def buying NS2 when its released

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=Firegod522;22553619]To clear up what I said earlier.

If I got the Spark Editor for free without actually buying the game to try out (Such as a free trial or something). I would mess around in it. But since I have to buy the game, before I try it. I'm not going to buy the game for a tool...[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't expect you too. Well, check out the game first and foremost. If you have the original Half-Life game (Not the Source engine port.) you can play Natural Selection a see if you like that. I think you will be surprised by how sophisticated the game really is. NS2 is being directed by the same person who made the first one, so I think there reason for suspicion of the game being bastardized, even though we have not gotten to play it. You can pre-order NS2 for $30 or get the special edition for $40 which involves being able to play-test the game for them later on when an alpha build of the actual game is released.

- Oh wait, never mind, the standard pre-order price for NS2 is $20. That's pretty damn affordable for most.

[QUOTE=ouch-that-hurts;22554115]Natural selection was one of the greatest half life mods ever, The gameplay was so different from what i was used to at the time (CS,DOD,TFC) having to stay together in small teams and build resource points and other equipment to secure the map. Looking out for skulks jumping out vents or hiding on roofs cloaked laughing before they pounce, Lerks swooping down spraying toxic gas keeping you distracted while a fade rips apart one of your team mates. Not to mention the fear of hearing one of your team mates shouting ONOS!!! and everyone running in different directions.

Yep im def buying NS2 when its released[/QUOTE]
Amen. It's a shame that CS came out on top, it was a good game, but no where near as sophisticated as NS.

If you are interested in seeing the maps people are currently making, you can take a look through these 80+ of amazing work by people. And as you will see, some people are not so good at making maps, I guess there is skill involved.
[url]http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=108129[/url]

[nubblecakes]

[QUOTE=robmaister12;22551218]NS2 Editor < Source SDK < UDK

[editline]02:44AM[/editline]

also, subtractive mapping < additive mapping[/QUOTE]

Isn't subtractive mapping where you start out with an empty space and subtract space from it (thus creating a solid)? Or am I flipping things around and it's completely solid and you subtract from that solid to create[I] space[/I]?

All I know is that UE3 allows both types, depending on what type of map you're making (indoor or outdoor).

[Crimson66]

[QUOTE=laptopman;22521477]Here's why not.

I would rather only pay 10-20 bucks for ep2 than pay 50 bucks for this.

It uses much more processing power and graphics card capability, so not everyone can run it, especially not fast.

Why would we map for NS2 when we want to make stuff for source. It's not like you can port it easily.

An avid level designer wants options, and not be restricted to just a few primitives and props.

And finally, THIS IS THE GARRYSMOD SECTION. IF YOU WANT TO ADVERTISE GAMES GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.

Thank you and goodnight.

Ns2 mapping requires almost no skill. You can only make blocks and place props/lighting, while in regular source you have to practice, get good, learn the ins and outs, and use complex i/o.[/QUOTE]

Too bad it's only 20 dollars to buy this game.

And how do you know what it IS and ISN'T restricted to?
They are releasing all the tools and open sourcing the game.

And just because it has a real time editor doesn't make it any less difficult/easy to use,
if someone who sucks just shows up and throws some stuff together it probably won't
play well or look good.
Crysis has a similar style real time editor, and why dont you go take a look at their mapping forums, people post trash all the time, but the people who really spend time polishing their maps really stand out.

And for fuck's sake, "You can only make blocks and place props/lighting" EVERYTHING YOU DO IN SOURCE IS MADE OUT OF "BLOCKS" and prop's and god damn lighting.
Blocks are the basis of everything, whether the block be combined to make other shapes etc. or not.
And who says there isn't I/O in NS2 mapping, any mapping engine requires I/O to make specialized situations.

Sounds like you just want to sit and wait for source to compile maps all day long.
Even if you optimize a map, if it is of a decent size it still takes a while to compile, so why bother even waiting?

And about processing power, NS2 optimizes hardcore on it's own just like how source does, only in source you have to set up all of your optimization on your own, which is just another step that can be avoided in NS2.

And if you favor source over a new game because it runs better then you are completely retarded. Games are always going to look better than source now, get with the times, get a job and spend some money on a graphics card and learn to not be a scrub.

So quit trying to be a GMOD elitest, sounds like you are just upset that you had to map the hard way for so long, free form editors are the ideal future for level design, and they will continue to appear in new games no matter how easy you think it is.
Level design should be about ability to do what you want artistically and from a game design standpoint, and not about being limited to sources engine size and lighting restraints.

I must say that all of your complaints are completely irrelevant.

[Zally13]

Late...?

[Jaehead]

[QUOTE=nubblecakes;22565393]Isn't subtractive mapping where you start out with an empty space and subtract space from it (thus creating a solid)? Or am I flipping things around and it's completely solid and you subtract from that solid to create[I] space[/I]?

All I know is that UE3 allows both types, depending on what type of map you're making (indoor or outdoor).[/QUOTE]

the first one

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=Jaehead;22569243]the first one[/QUOTE]

I thought so as well, my mistake.

[QUOTE=Crimson66;22565949]So quit trying to be a GMOD elitest, sounds like you are just [I]upset that you had to map the hard way for so long[/I], free form editors are the ideal future for level design, and they will continue to appear in new games no matter how easy you think it is.
[I]Level design should be about ability to do what you want artistically and from a game design standpoint[/I], and [I]not about being limited to sources engine size and lighting restraints[/I].

I must say that all of your complaints are completely irrelevant.[/QUOTE]

Couldn't have said it better myself. There was a professional advertising artist that visited my school recently. He stated that no matter how good software like Photoshop gets, you still need artistic ability in understanding lighting, visual weight, and style and that you still need to know how to use a paint brush. In this sense, Photoshop is a more effective paint brush that allows an artist to better express what he wants to do in a less amount of time. This is how people should compare editors.

By the way, to everyone else, don't use a dumb rating as a disagree rating.

[kukiric]

I, for myself, can't wait to get my own hands into the Spark editor.

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=kukiric;22569929]I, for myself, can't wait to get my own hands into the Spark editor.[/QUOTE]

Save your expectations until you actually use it. The editor is still in it's early stages, so you will find many features not present yet, but the fundamentals of the Spark editor are much better than Hammer.

[DoctorSalt]

Hmmm, why is everyone so damn excited over this?

If one is looking forward to these features so much, why not start mapping for the unreal engine instead?

That already includes things such as scalable props, "WYSIWYG", large map sizes, friggin sweet lighting etc.

Or if you want to map for the lesser powered computers, source is there too.

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=DoctorSalt;22570212]Hmmm, why is everyone so damn excited over this?

If one is looking forward to these features so much, why not start mapping for the unreal engine instead?

That already includes things such as scalable props, "WYSIWYG", large map sizes, friggin sweet lighting etc.

Or if you want to map for the lesser powered computers, source is there too.[/QUOTE]

Because spark is like the best of both worlds. Ease of use and ability to make a map by yourself within a realistic time frame like Source, while changing places that bother people in Hammer and Source. Take lighting for example. I place a light in spark, realize its not quite bright enough or just the right hue, so I change it and see the results instantly, then I can change it a bit more and get it right in about 30 seconds. In hammer, I place a light, compile, see what I need to change, go back back to hammer and enter some new values, compile again, and see my results. The latter, using hammer, took about 4 - 6+ minutes depending on your experience.

[nubblecakes]

[QUOTE=DoctorSalt;22570212]Hmmm, why is everyone so damn excited over this?

If one is looking forward to these features so much, why not start mapping for the unreal engine instead?

That already includes things such as scalable props, "WYSIWYG", large map sizes, friggin sweet lighting etc.

Or if you want to map for the lesser powered computers, source is there too.[/QUOTE]

I thought with UE3 you had to bake to get the finalized look. There's real time lighting but it's not "baked" lighting I'm told. So the "WYSIWYG" isn't completely true I guess, but I doubt it matters.

But I don't see why we [I]shouldn't[/I] try out the Spark Editor.

[Firegod522]

Subtractive is where everything is filled in and you (don't kill me) carve holes inside of a blank space to play in.

[Sultan]

Speaking of carving didn't carve use to work for source? Or has it been broke forever.

[Zally13]

[QUOTE=Sultan;22572652]Speaking of carving didn't carve use to work for source? Or has it been broke forever.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much forever. Yet people back in the day didn't know it was bad.

Also, the one thing Natural Selection 2 doesn't have is a large modding base. Maybe it will, who knows.

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=nubblecakes;22570456]But I don't see why we [I]shouldn't[/I] try out the Spark Editor.[/QUOTE]

This is what people are primarily mad about, for reasons I don't know. But essentially, nobody wants, and I don't blame them, to move away from Source mapping because that is where the support and players are.

Natural Selection's player base was huge when the mod hit, and nearly all of the same players, modders, and even more people are here watching the development for NS2. Many are already getting serious about modding and are starting to script simple online death-match game modes that have nothing to do with NS2. The developers have said many times that they are building an engine and tools that don't just suit their needs, but the modders as well for whatever they dream up. It's just something they want to give back to the community since NS1 was a mod.

And yes, much of NS2's engine and tools are inspired by the Source engine, but it also takes some of the best features of other engines and tools and puts them into one.

[Pj The Dj]

[QUOTE=nubblecakes;22570456]I thought with UE3 you had to bake to get the finalized look. There's real time lighting but it's not "baked" lighting I'm told. So the "WYSIWYG" isn't completely true I guess, but I doubt it matters.[/QUOTE]

You're right. I don't think you're limited to precompiled lighting but I don't think it supports it very well. However it's lightmaps and various other things add up to what I think is the best lighting around for static scenes, especially with UDK's global illumination.

[editline]09:43AM[/editline]

[QUOTE=nubblecakes;22565393]Isn't subtractive mapping where you start out with an empty space and subtract space from it (thus creating a solid)? Or am I flipping things around and it's completely solid and you subtract from that solid to create[I] space[/I]?

All I know is that UE3 allows both types, depending on what type of map you're making (indoor or outdoor).[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure it's the second one.

Subtractive because you start with a block and subtract parts from it therefore creating inside space. Additive because you add blocks to an empty space and create whatever the fuck you want.

[robmaister12]

Subtractive means that the void is completely filled with mass, and that you subtract out of that mass to make space.

Additive means that the void is completely empty and that you add mass to make space.

[TheDecryptor]

[QUOTE=Hostel;22551075]Well, I'll break this down. Other than having the proper shaders to do so, most engines rely on a certain kind of texture that gives info on how specular lighting looks on it's corresponding texture, much like how bumpmaps function.

Source has a phong shader for models, which is essentially specular lighting, but the shader cannot be used on primitive/brushes. Instead, we use envmap shader, which is a pre-compiled method that is not accurate what so ever. Brush textures with envmap rely on cube map entity information. After compiling a map, we use the command buildcubemaps in which each entity take a small image from every side. Textures with envmap find the nearest cube map and use the image as a reflection for it's surface. If you look at it this way, envmap is not even a partial form of specular lighting.[/QUOTE]

There's specular reflection and specular highlighting, environment maps and cubemaps form the reflection parts, phong forms the highlight parts.

But yeah, you can't use Phong on brushes in source, only on models (Similar to how you can only use self-shadowing bumpmaps on brushes and not models)

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=robmaister12;22576343]Subtractive means that the void is completely filled with mass, and that you subtract out of that mass to make space.

Additive means that the void is completely empty and that you add mass to make space.[/QUOTE]

That is what I thought. It is sort of in the term itself.

I hope that two pages of me repeating myself has gotten everyone on the right track. I know there is very few features currently in the Spark Editor, but if you watch videos of anyone using it, you can see the fundamentals of constructing and lighting a level are very streamlined, faster, and designed better for smaller work teams, and it doesn't constrain users to a certain typical workflow. You work the way you want to.

[Hazard24]

Hopefully it'll be a good editor, but I'm waiting until it can do outdoor environments well before I download it

[DeanWinchester]

[QUOTE=Hostel;22522259]Haha, free? I think not. Go buy Microsoft Visual studio for compiling your C++ programming and 3DS Max. It's not so cheap now is it?

Even if you got those tools for free, modelling levels, UV wrapping them, and programming in C++ is much more time consuming than using an easy scripting language like lua. You would need to get very serious about it, get a few other dedicated people to help you with the project and be ready to spend about 2 - 5 years making the mod depending on the size of the mod.[/QUOTE]

1. UDK is free, you have to pay for [b]a license[/b] only if you want to use it in Commercial Projects, but that's a given for any other engine.

2. There's something called Microsoft Visual Studio Express, which is in fact free and compiles my C++ code just fine, there are also plenty of other alternatives. Besides that, UDK doesn't need C++ at all, it also has a scripting language.

3. 3ds Max is not an essential tool, there's Blender which is free and UDK has plenty of plugins not only for Blender, but also 3ds Max, Maya, XSI, and a bunch of other modelling packages. Even 3ds Max and Maya have 60 day trials and there's the student versions which most people in college can get for a much cheaper price.

4. Any good mod takes its time to make, it really depends on the scale and the ambition of the project as well as how many people work on it, how much free time they have and how much of that time they use for making the mod, so you can't really determine how long something takes to make unless you take into account all those variables and even then it would be called "pulling numbers out of your ass".

[Hostel]

[QUOTE=DeanWinchester;22590800]1. UDK is free, you have to pay for [b]a license[/b] only if you want to use it in Commercial Projects, but that's a given for any other engine.

2. There's something called Microsoft Visual Studio Express, which is in fact free and compiles my C++ code just fine, there are also plenty of other alternatives. Besides that, UDK doesn't need C++ at all, it also has a scripting language.

3. 3ds Max is not an essential tool, there's Blender which is free and UDK has plenty of plugins not only for Blender, but also 3ds Max, Maya, XSI, and a bunch of other modelling packages. Even 3ds Max and Maya have 60 day trials and there's the student versions which most people in college can get for a much cheaper price.

4. Any good mod takes its time to make, it really depends on the scale and the ambition of the project as well as how many people work on it, how much free time they have and how much of that time they use for making the mod, so you can't really determine how long something takes to make unless you take into account all those variables and even then it would be called "pulling numbers out of your ass".[/QUOTE]

Don't get worked up, I simply chose expensive industry software because that it really just what works best if you plan to model an entire level. I have used Blender and I find that acceptable as well (I am glad there is at least one good open source 3D modelling software out there, I wouldn't really suffice with anything else that was free). I was also aware about was Epic did with their engine in November last year and how it has become open to all indie devs. You just pay an initial lump sum of about $100 to release your game, and you give 25% of revenue back to Epic after you make $5000 worth of profit. I was not aware of the Express version of VS, so you have me there. As for the nature of level design, a project can be completed faster with another development kit, depending on what the tools are curved for. Unknown Worlds said that they dropped Source because of its time consuming pre-compile schemes. They designed something that would allow them to see their changes at run-time. So in that sense, different editors make a difference depending on the size of your team. Smaller teams, or one person, work better with Source and the Spark than Unreal Engine 3.