Arena maps: A rant.

[Username]

First things first. What is up with all the arena remake hate? People are getting flamed for turning a map they like (or dislike) into an arena. Why? What's so wrong with people tweaking old maps to fit with the new gametype? The arguments I've seen so far are
1) It takes no effort.
2) It's stealing from the map's creator.
3) It's "just decompiling a map and switching some entities around".
4) It's "not a real map".

...
So?
Your point is?
Yes, it's extremely easy to make an old map into an arena map. But who says all maps have to be month long processes? It's just as much a creation, even if it took less effort. I honestly think none of these mappers so far have made arena maps just for the sake of making arena maps. Look at arena_hydro. It's not "just decompiling a map and switching entities around". It's recognizing that arena could quite possibly be the solution to the constant stalemates of hydro we've been looking for. It's not a job a mapper puts month of sweat and tears into, like tc_meridian or ctf_Aerospace. It's more of a "Hm, this might work, I'll give it a shot" kinda job. So yes, in a way, they aren't "real maps". They're not epic masterpieces designed with painstaking detail by a dedicated artist. They're funnies, comic strips, political cartoons, but pieces of art nonetheless. And like political cartoons, they seem degrading to some. But in reality, they're just an opinion, a one-off. They may be smaller and, dare I say, cheaper than most custom maps, but they're just as much a contribution to the community as any other.

So for the love of god, stop wasting all your energy fuming at people doing something you don't completely agree with and spend your time doing better things. Like mapping. Or reading a book. Or anything.
I swear, there's no need to throw a temper tantrum. :glare:

Edit: Removed redundancy.

[Snipergen]

I think I have a clear view about this finally.

1. People that decompile and recompile - the thieves
These guys don't take mapping seriously and just mess with hammer. If ANYTHING, how terrible or shameful it even is, reaches a server (and preferably has their name in awesome brushwork written ALL OVER THE MAP), than these guys are satisfied.
Don't forget they make clan maps too with the secret rooms.


2. People that create worlds - the mappers
These guys take their hobby serious, they start from scratch and use the props and textures, or even make their own content, and make a wonderful map. It takes these guys a few months to get a finished product. It takes in all their free time. Than the map is finished, and they see 1 or 2 servers playing it because the file size is over 9000. But hey, they are ok with it, they didn't steal or make an orange map, they made a piece of art. The only satisfaction they need is self respect that they made a great map for a great game, not ruining it for the community with spamming crap maps, no, they just make 1 perfect map.


So, for me, these are the possibilitys. I know what mapper I am. What mapper are you?

*puts on sunglasses*

YEAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[samn]

Decompiled and recompiled maps aren't necessarily bad maps with silly things scrawled all over the place, that is a huge generalisation...

[Zmathue]

When you decompile a map you are taking a designer's hard work and using it for yourself. So, before you go around decompiling maps as you please and throwing the VMFs up on the internet, please take a moment to think about yourself dedicating a small portion of your life to something and then someone breaking it into a million pieces. .

[Youme]

When you decompile a map you are taking a designer's hard work and using it for yourself. So, before you go around decompiling maps as you please and throwing the VMFs up on the internet, please take a moment to think about yourself dedicating a small portion of your life to something and then someone breaking it into a million pieces.
Quoted again for truth.

I just know that I'd be absolutely furious if someone decompiled any of my maps and rereleased them after slightly modifying them. Its much similar to the issue of overpaints thats common in the digital art scene, someone takes someone elses work and without permission they paint over it and say its their own, more often then not the original artist is upset by this and its a really frowned upon practice now.

With permission decompile/recompile is fine.
Without permission decompile/recompile should be punishable by a short drop and a sudden stop.

So a plea to anyone who wishes to alter an existing map that isn't theirs originally: seek permission, then when you have it proclaim it loudly and proudly to avoid agressors.

[samn]

Personally I don't mind if someone else takes my map and modifies it. When I release something I usually provide the source (in the case of mapping, the VMF file) so that others can look at what I made, how I made it, learn from it and point out things that I'm doing wrong. If they want to re-release a map I made thats fine, as long as I am given credit for the original design.

Not everyone can be expected to follow this philosophy so it is still advisable for you to seek the permission of whoever made the map. Valve generally don't seem to mind people modifying their maps, and I just can't imagine them getting upset about things like pl_heights or cp_2fort.

[MrAlBobo]

It takes in all their free time. Than the map is finished, and they see 1 or 2 servers playing it because the file size is over 9000. But hey, they are ok with it, they didn't steal or make an orange map, they made a piece of art. The only satisfaction they need is self respect that they made a great map for a great game, not ruining it for the community with spamming crap maps, no, they just make 1 perfect map.


I have an issue with this...valves maps tend to be larger in filesize then most custom maps...so...these being decompiled and recompiled tend to not only be a waste of effort but also take forever to download...and only to get a slightly different version of something you already have

[cornontheCoD]

hmmmm, I dont know what to think about it. Snipergen seems to feel very strongly about this. I understand if the mapper would be mad about their original work being changed, but I don't see why people won't at least give it a chance. I know hardly anyone plays hydro, so why not change it to make it better? I think it is ok if it is just entity swapping.

eh, I tried to come up with a metaphor to compare it with, but it didnt work :laugh:

[drpepper]

I emailed Valve a few days ago regarding decompiling their maps and modifying them and then releasing them under a different gametype or mode.

Whatever Valve's stand is, it will also stand for TF2Maps.net

I will update the site's rules when I get a reply.

[Shmitz]

I don't see a problem with the original creator of a map to take a portion of it and convert it to a different play style, such as arena. However, the way I look at it, that is their decision to make and theirs alone. They are the ones who came up with the original design, and the ones who understand that design enough to know if it can or should work with a different game type.

So if the original designer makes the modification or grants permission, it's fine because they've made that decision. If someone else makes it, that is unethical, unoriginal, and contemptible.

[TheBladeRoden]

What he said

[Rad]

Edit: Oops, wrong topic. I had multiple windows open

On my opinion, I think it's okay as long as the original mapper is fine with it. I don't see anything wrong with experimenting with making previous maps new gameplay types. Not all maps have to be massive masterpieces. A few little simple maps are nice, too. Besides, isn't the most important thing that the map is fun, not whether it took months to make?

[VelvetFistIronGlove]

As a general rule, I'm strongly opposed to it. But with the stock Valve maps, I don't have a problem with it ethically. To me they're just another part of the SDK, like all the props and materials. In which case I judge the result by the care and effort and respect for the map and gamemode that's gone into it, just as I would a fully original map.

[Laz]

So, for me, these are the possibilitys. I know what mapper I am. What mapper are you?

*puts on sunglasses*

YEAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH

CSI Hammer?

I don't really mind the whole thing. they do whatever they have to do. some people enjoy it, so be it. I personally wouldn't get the same satisfaction from reworking some else's map, then I would from building an entire multi-stage map from scratch.

I know why I put in the effort. cause creating worlds is what I do, and I love doing it.
If modifying worlds is what they do, and they love it, I say let em.

[cornontheCoD]

Okay, I get what you guys are saying. But what about this compared to valve texture re-colors/modifications?:confused: I don't know how most people like it or not, but I don't see much of a difference between the two

[Uriak]

As someone said above, I don't have ethical problems too with remixing/modifications of stock maps. Of course I don't have the same view for custom content made by amateurs. Even getting a single texture would not be correct in my opinion (the numbers of time I was told to "borrow" palm trees from egypt or meridian :p - I always rejected such an idea, even for a private map).

Though, the distinctions between mappers and stealers is irrelevant, imho. Sure there are some highly criticable dudes. The distinction would be in the aim of a mapper
->provide something to play with (enjoyable if possible), from a totally crazy new gamemode, to a variations or adaptation of know things
->provide a personnal vision of a map (with it's story and layout) A "world"

Of course most maps are a mix of these two. That scales from recompiled map like pl_dustbowl to custom madness as meridian and aerospace. In between stand custom maps with not so custom content. And because players do seek a mix of it, the sucess is unpredictable. I have to say with honesty, that "impressive" maps are given a warm welcome on our servers, but gameplay wise most of them aren't played for long. The "greatest" success of world crafting and gameplay would be egypt at the moment. People involved for months into their projects should be aware of this and either consider they'll be satisfied with critic approval or center their work around excellent gameplay.

Remember although there are still some custom servers with "vanilla rules" (no fast respawn, 24 players, no 24/7) which don't include achievements/rainbow crazyness maps. Keep the good mood :)

[toboruin]

I personally don't like the idea of people decompiling maps and making a few minor tweaks, however, I don't mind it, if they do it, either to get reference or to fix broken gameplay/glitches, but they should always credit the maker of the map. I like the way that TBR's edit of "Orange X", they say "This was created by *Insert creators name here*, Edited by *Insert editor's name here"

[Username]

Now for a totally different question: Would you object to somebody decompiling arena_lumberyard and turning it into a cp_ map? Personally, I'd like to see it done, hopefully by valve.

[Youme]

I hope it doesn't happen. and I hope valve don't do it.
So far when valve have changed the gamemode of a map they've made poorer jobs of it and I'm generally against remaking other peoples maps (valves or otherwise) even if you DO have permission.

[Zmathue]

I'm sure valve, being a video game company, tested all of there maps as arena mode way before the patch. Hydro and 2fort probably did not test well and they decided not to release then because people would criticize them about the levels they love being changed in a way very few would enjoy them.

By them allowing someone to change there maps the community gets to see how the map would play in arena mode without being able to blame valve about the smallest mistake or bad flow of gameplay.

[Snipergen]

How the hell would you make lumberyard cp? It's only sized for 1 cp :/

[Youme]

How the hell would you make lumberyard cp? It's only sized for 1 cp :/

by building more of the map for other CPs, this is why I don't think it will work, no one has the drive to add a whole 2 more points to each side, I doubt valve has either. turning a cp map into arena is far more likely because it can be done in a single day since you're pretty much only removing stuff.

[Username]

Exactly, and that's why they're of lower quality. I'm guessing ctf_well took valve way less time to make, and it showed. After they reorganized it and changed it, I think it's one of the better ctf maps out there. In the same way, forcing them to make new content for cp_lumberyard would mean that new content is geared directly towards the cp_ gametype. So I believe it'd have the same high quality as the other cp_ maps Valve has made. And if Valve doesn't have the drive to add two more cap points (then mirror them for the other side), how would it have the drive to make a new map? I don't think "drive" is the issue here.

[Hawk]

They said on the TF2 blog that they do intend to make good use of the new alpine environment... so we'll get new Alpine maps for sure, and they'll be better.... brand new, not made out of that arena map. I'm really excited to see what they cook up, and I hope we see something "Alpine" in the next batch of maps.

[FaTony]

Look at arena_hydro. It's not "just decompiling a map and switching entities around". It's recognizing that arena could quite possibly be the solution to the constant stalemates of hydro we've been looking for. It's not a job a mapper puts month of sweat and tears into, like tc_meridian or ctf_Aerospace. It's more of a "Hm, this might work, I'll give it a shot" kinda job.

Thank you so much, Username! You are the only one who completely understand me.

So for the love of god, stop wasting all your energy fuming at people doing something you don't completely agree with

Brilliant!!!

1. People that decompile and recompile - the thieves
2. People that create worlds - the mappers

So I guess I belong to group 3.

3. People who create world and modify other worlds without stealing - mapping darkside
These guys can create awesome maps and fix other maps without decompiling.

I know hardly anyone plays hydro, so why not change it to make it better? I think it is ok if it is just entity swapping.
Not all maps have to be massive masterpieces. A few little simple maps are nice, too. Besides, isn't the most important thing that the map is fun, not whether it took months to make?
If modifying worlds is what they do, and they love it, I say let em.
if they do it, either to get reference or to fix broken gameplay/glitches, but they should always credit the maker of the map.
By them allowing someone to change there maps the community gets to see how the map would play in arena mode without being able to blame valve about the smallest mistake or bad flow of gameplay.

So true.

And remember, we are talking about freedom of expression.

Now for a totally different question: Would you object to somebody decompiling arena_lumberyard and turning it into a cp_ map? Personally, I'd like to see it done, hopefully by valve.

I can make in... *counting* 10 minutes :D

[A Boojum Snark]

Personally... I feel arena maps shouldn't be made period, regardless of method.
Arena is a horrible scourge valve has placed on TF2 and they need to be smacked for doing so. I mean honestly, how many servers had sudden death disabled because so many people disliked it? Then valve thinks it's a good idea to form an entire game mode around it?

Contributing to it makes me a sad panda.

[MrAlBobo]

personally, i find arena is quite useful for when there are less then 6 people in the server
i mean, very few maps are playable and with good gameplay when there are not very many people in the game

[A Boojum Snark]

Arena gameplay may be "balanced" for small numbers, but it's no better than low-numbers normal play. They are both far from being how an actual 24 man game plays out, and that's where the problem lies.

Having come from playing Natural Selection, Arena is unbelievably saddening, because it is appearing to be the exact same situation as when Combat mode was added to NS.
NS and TF2 both had the same problem: low player count makes for unfun game. The solution in both: create a new game mode more suited for low player counts by making it primarily deathmatch and removing the core element of the normal game modes. Then the new game modes are no better at getting servers going because they are so drastically different from the "real" game that a lot of people don't like them, along with other people ending up loving the new mode and don't play the "real" thing anymore.
The result: community fragmentation, mapcycles that annoy people, and servers going from full to dead within one cycle.

[samn]

Fatony, by map conversion standards your arena_hydro was pretty awful, I remember seeing large healthpacks lying around

[FaTony]

I remember seeing large healthpacks lying around

Is that bad?

[Uriak]

Depends. It lessens the need for a medic or engie in the team. Create some hot spots in the map. Let those who barely escape alive a chance to fight back.

But if there are several of them it could broke the game perhaps. By example, how is a scout supposed to take down an heavy camping the healthspot ?

[grazr]

Arena certainly has it's purpose, don't get me wrong. They can fill a server, but then, so do a lot of other larger levels.

In level design terms i don't hate arena and i have no objection to people creating them. Heck, this is a good oppotunity for novice level designers to get some practice and see what they can do without having the stresses of creating the wholey more complicated dustbowl and payload setups. Basically "the new guy" on the forums doesn't have to make an idiot out of himself by saing "i'm making a dm box map for TF2" because he can atleast turn that into something worthwhile, if he chooses to put the effert in of course.

As for remakes, they should not happen. So you think you can make something play better? Ultimately people like us have no place deciding this and as has been said a thousand times, if it is to be done, get permission. If you want an arena version of a Valve map, the most sensible course of action is to send a request email to valve, if they get enough, heck they'll probably do it; they made cp_steel official for the same reasons.

But why bother. (I don't mean why bother sending valve an email, i mean.. changing a maps gamemode).

Make your own map. It's infitinitely more satisfying, infinitely more gratifying and a respectable work effert. Going into a map and ent-editing for purposes of simply changing it's game mode isn't going to earn you salvation or respect, especially in a community like this. People want to see original work and this is to a lack of better words a customisation site, not a Valve maintenance site. We're not here to fix Valve's broken produce, or anyone elses; that's their job. We have our own job as custom level designers. Personally ent-editing someone elses map is not level design, there is no design involved and the level is already there.

If you've resorted to creating alternative game modes for existing maps by other people then you probably need the practice in making your own anyway, and if you have any intention of releasing your own map then i'd advise to get cracking; because we're all waiting in eager anticipation! These maps don't get fumed, atleast not untill the person responsible demands for a bigger response from the community than he initially recieved, thereby forcing peoples strong opinions on this usbject onto himself.

I guess the saying should go, why try to fix something that may not even be broken when you can make something new that's better.

[Username]

First of all, I actually enjoy arena thoroughly. I think the bad blood comes from people trying 32 man arena servers. No. Just no. Arena is meant for a max server size of 18-20. And the real question that decides whether you like arena is simple: Can you have fun while you're getting your bum handed to you? If not, then move on. 50% of the time, you're going to be on the losing team. And that means yes, you'll be sitting out some. Use the time to discuss tactics with your team. On smaller servers, you never have to sit out for long unless you didn't play intelligently and work with your team.

As to grazr: Yes. Arena remakes aren't the same as normal maps. And yes, making your own map is much more satisfying. But some people don't have the time or inspiration to make their own map. Or an existing map could be their inspiration. What I was asking is why people are being flamed and degraded for choosing to remake a map. I don't think remakes are reflective of a good mapper. But that doesn't mean I can't respect someone's personal choice. I'm no mod, but some of the remarks leveraged at those people doing remakes, especially those aimed at FaTony, would be put in the "flaming" category by me. If someone's doing a remake, and you don't agree with them, do you really need to say something along the lines of "You're not a real mapper", or "Remakes are the slime of the mapping community"? Even if you're provoked, there's no reason to fall to their level. Why not just encourage them to put more time and individuality into the map? Or better yet, not reply at all?

[Shmitz]

I'm no mod, but some of the remarks leveraged at those people doing remakes, especially those aimed at FaTony, would be put in the "flaming" category by me. If someone's doing a remake, and you don't agree with them, do you really need to say something along the lines of "You're not a real mapper", or "Remakes are the slime of the mapping community"? Even if you're provoked, there's no reason to fall to their level. Why not just encourage them to put more time and individuality into the map? Or better yet, not reply at all?

FaTony doesn't get flamed because he makes remakes or decompiles. He doesn't get flamed because he uses HL2 textures. He doesn't get flamed because he makes maps that give gross advantages to particular classes. He doesn't get flamed because the quality of his work is only a hair above "my first map".

People flame him because he never ever listens to advice or criticism, never tries to grow and improve as a mapper, and is only concerned with receiving the positive recognition he thinks he deserves simply for being himself. He acts like a child when people don't praise his work. I can definitely sympathize with the frustration this causes otherwise well-meaning members of the community.

On the other hand, I completely agree saying nothing at all and ignoring him would be far more productive in this case.

[grazr]

But some people don't have the time or inspiration to make their own map.

In this case i would ask why they chose to open hammer in the first place and then go on to join a level design forum.

"I don't have a lot of time" is and excuse i've seen time and time again for the production of aim maps in cs. Regardless of their level of inspiration. I don't mean to sound harsh but if you don't have enough time then i would advise getting a hobby you can commit sufficient time to. For ones own sake..

When i go back to university i wont have time to design levels. So i'll have to stop. I'm not going to try to justify my existance in the level design community by modifying other maps in ways like this. Of course i'll remain active on the forums to try to help others and even learn more myself.

[FaTony]

never tries to grow and improve as a mapper

Hey, hey, hey! Now that is truly wrong!

[Snipergen]

3. People who create world and modify other worlds without stealing - mapping darkside
These guys can create awesome maps and fix other maps without decompiling.


Wait what? Create maps? :rolleyes:

There are only 2 possibility's FaTony, you take mapping serious or you don't.

[Acegikmo]

I generallt don't like it when people steal other's maps and changes the gamemode of it, unless they have permission to do so from the author of the map.
And converting a map to arena maps is ok as long as it's your own map you're changing.

[Username]

*sigh* Once again, I'm cursed with seeing both sides of the issue... How about this scenario? My current job is scanning and converting all the blueprints of schools for a school district into PDF files. One day, while looking at an overview plan of a school, I see it could make a good map. So I copy all the PDFs onto a thumb drive and use the blueprints to recreate the school's layout, and turn it into an arena map. This took no thought, no inspiration to make. Yet wasn't it an act of creation? I'm not creating something unique. Yet can't I call the map my own?
Say I took an enormous amount of screenshots of hydro, and painstakingly recreated the map in hammer. Is that any better than decompiling? What is it you have a problem with, the decompiling, or the reuse of ideas?

[FaTony]

I'm completely confused.

[Username]

Basically, why don't people like remakes?
Because they take less effort?
Because they're not unique ideas?
Or because it feels like theft?

[DJive]

Basically, why don't people like remakes?
Because they take less effort?
Because they're not unique ideas?
Or because it feels like theft?

I dont mind remakes however what i do dislike about them is not all but most remakes have no fit into the tf2maps play style and the author *porter* make sno effort for it to. If i made q3dm17

http://lvlworld.com/levels/map-aedm17/map-aedm17lg.jpg

Even if i TF2'ed it up this map doesnt belong in TF2, it was never designed for TF2 style game play and wouldn't fit, yet people do this...

"ROFLCOPTERBBQ!!1, MY FAVORITE MAP FROM 5Y AGO !!11" and they make 0 effort into ever thinking about

Balance
TF2s art style
learning hammer
the mapping community.


I'm not a big fan of any of Viles work * I like Vile though!!* because most of it is ports and that is not my thing. One thing you will see with Vile though is he will at least go with the tf2 art style and i think he changes some ways for balance issues as well so props to him.

There are other "porters" and a main one not to be mentions who don't give a crap about making it "for" tf2, they just want it "in" tf2. They don't change the textures, they don't add anything from tf2, they dont change the layout to fit TF2 and to add balance, Im 90% sure that they just decompile the map, add a CP and recompile it for tf2.

THOSE are the people i have no respect for and i think ruin the community and Custom mapping.

[Snipergen]

I'm not a big fan of any of Viles work * I like Vile though!!* because most of it is ports and that is not my thing. One thing you will see with Vile though is he will at least go with the tf2 art style and i think he changes some ways for balance issues as well so props to him.



I agree and disagree, vile uses only tf2 textures and props but he also adapts the old tf style in the quake ages, you can see it in mach, chaos, impact.... Castle also doesn't fit in tf2 etc.
I still haven't figured out why he does that, hes a level designer that takes his hobby serious but I haven't seen a classic TF2 building in one of his maps.
Hes a good guy though, and maps way too fast.

[Shmitz]

I agree and disagree, vile uses only tf2 textures and props but he also adapts the old tf style in the quake ages, you can see it in mach, chaos, impact.... Castle also doesn't fit in tf2 etc.
I still haven't figured out why he does that, hes a level designer that takes his hobby serious but I haven't seen a classic TF2 building in one of his maps.
Hes a good guy though, and maps way too fast.

dom_canalzone comes a lot closer than his any of his other maps. It still has a blocky q3-feel to it in some areas, and suffers from "must put a point_spotlight on every light no matter how dust-free and well-lit the area might be", but it's still nice to see non-spytech themes in his work.

[Username]

dom_canalzone comes a lot closer than his any of his other maps. It still has a blocky q3-feel to it in some areas, and suffers from "must put a point_spotlight on every light no matter how dust-free and well-lit the area might be", but it's still nice to see non-spytech themes in his work.

When I first played canalzone, I assumed it was using hl2 textures. It didn't feel much like a TF2 map to me at all. A lot of the walls seemed to "noisy" to be TF2, and it didn't have the caricaturization and exaggeration that I've come to know and love from TF2. I mean, what's a TF2 map without a giant rocket/laserbeam/heap of missiles?

[Shmitz]

As far as I've seen, he only uses TF2 textures. Also, I have to retract my comment about the point_spotlights. Running through it again, they're a lot less prevalent than I thought. I think it was just the ones on top of the warehouse roof pointing up into the daylit sky that caught my attention so much.

[Earl]

*sigh* Once again, I'm cursed with seeing both sides of the issue... How about this scenario? My current job is scanning and converting all the blueprints of schools for a school district into PDF files. One day, while looking at an overview plan of a school, I see it could make a good map. So I copy all the PDFs onto a thumb drive and use the blueprints to recreate the school's layout, and turn it into an arena map. This took no thought, no inspiration to make. Yet wasn't it an act of creation? I'm not creating something unique. Yet can't I call the map my own?
Say I took an enormous amount of screenshots of hydro, and painstakingly recreated the map in hammer. Is that any better than decompiling? What is it you have a problem with, the decompiling, or the reuse of ideas?

Recreating real areas in maps is OK. But dont make the copy too true to life, gameplay can suffer. (I also wouldnt recommend making a map of your school, people are too scared by school shootings and all, they'd probably fire/expel you.) Recreating a real life place is takes loads more effort than decompiling or copying an existing level. (My map is loosely based on a real place).

[Username]

Yeah, my girlfriend found out about my idea, and she had heard of some kids getting taken to court for making a CS map of their school. Long story short, she made me promise to not do anything remotely near a school or anything I've scanned.

[bobby1211]

..The thought had not even crossed my mind... :glare:

Do we have any postal worker mappers? ::p:

-Bobby

[toboruin]

I got a suggestion, if people want arena maps of there favourite map by VALVe, Email VALVe and request them to do it. If you wanna see your favourite map arenafied that's custom, Email the creator to do it. Its a damn site easier doing it that way, and then you run less risk of destroying the style of the map that you loved.

[Sgt Frag]

I don't see a problem with the original creator of a map to take a portion of it and convert it to a different play style, such as arena. However, the way I look at it, that is their decision to make and theirs alone. They are the ones who came up with the original design, and the ones who understand that design enough to know if it can or should work with a different game type.

So if the original designer makes the modification or grants permission, it's fine because they've made that decision. If someone else makes it, that is unethical, unoriginal, and contemptible.


That's exactly how I feel as a mapper and an artist.

If you're gonna make a map make one. If Hydro is gonna become an arena (which is probably a good idea for alternate gameplay) then Valve should do it.
Maybe instead of doing it you should just write an email to valve and suggest it. If they think it's a good idea most likely it would be done.

[Sgt Frag]

*sigh* Once again, I'm cursed with seeing both sides of the issue... How about this scenario? My current job is scanning and converting all the blueprints of schools for a school district into PDF files. One day, while looking at an overview plan of a school, I see it could make a good map. So I copy all the PDFs onto a thumb drive and use the blueprints to recreate the school's layout, and turn it into an arena map. This took no thought, no inspiration to make. Yet wasn't it an act of creation? I'm not creating something unique. Yet can't I call the map my own?
Say I took an enormous amount of screenshots of hydro, and painstakingly recreated the map in hammer. Is that any better than decompiling? What is it you have a problem with, the decompiling, or the reuse of ideas?

There is a difference between using blue prints as a layout, then making that into a playable map.

and

Taking someone elses map and moving a few things around.

That would be like changing the poistion of a bathroom on the blueprint and selling it to someone else as your own design.

One is called mapping

The other is called EDITTING.

[cornontheCoD]

^except you dont make money off of custom mapping

just thought I'd say it. I dont disagree with you

[grazr]

When you are referencing that material (the blueprints) you are recreating one environement into another form. You are building it from scratch in your own style according to your own creative patterns, adding architexture, spawn locations, game devices, rules, setting lighting patterns. You will develop it for improved gameplay for this game. This is all your own work.

People here reference shacks and 1900 era western mining/outpost buildings from flickr. This is the same. They are recreating them how they see fit, in their minds, for TF2. You would provide gratification to anywhere you took a prefab or model from, created by another person. But changing a mode in an already produced map doesn't make it your work and you have no right to release as such.

Recreating every brush from scratch as to how it was before will not make a difference. The gameplay was designed by the level designer and although changing the mode may likely change the gameplay the environment is still not yours to edit.

I'll try and answer your questions more directly, from my own perspective.

Your school map:

This took no thought, no inspiration to make.

Yes it did, you saw the layout and you were inspired by it, you converted it to work for cs (much as i had mentioned in the first paragraph). You used released public developer material to produce a unique environment never before seen ingame. A lot of games are based on places in reality, that doesn't mean that the level designers shouldn't get credit for producing them.

Yet wasn't it an act of creation?

Yes it would have been, you applied the necassery functions, you provided people with an environment to the level of skill and knowlegde you have acquired.

I'm not creating something unique. Yet can't I call the map my own?

You can, just as other games can call their immitations/replications of places in reality their own.

Try applying this to say (since we are all referencing hydro) Hydro:

This took no thought, no inspiration to make. Yet wasn't it an act of creation?

No it didn't, someone else created it, you just flicked a switch to a lack of better words to change it's mode. It just happens to be that TF2 has more hands on needs to do such things.

I'm not creating something unique. Yet can't I call the map my own?

The map was already created for TF2, no you cannot call it your own.

This gets a little more difficult to define when dealing with "ports" of maps from other games. This area is a lot more grey.

[jumpyg1258]

I recently made an arena map (arena_canalzone) that was a remake of a classic TFC map, cz2. If you look at the download section on this site, you can see that I did not take sole credit for the map and credited Valve for the original map. I think that as long as you give credit where credit is due, everythings ok since you are not profiting on these maps and its for everyones benefit and enjoyment. Some of you say theres no creativity in doing this but I have to disagree. There may not be as much creativity but its still there. Take for instance the map I just mentioned, I had to think up and act on quite a few changes to the original cz2 layout in order to create a good arena map. Heck Ive been tempted lately to make a king-of-the-hill map out of lumberyard but in order to do that, I would have to change quite a few things about the map. Anyways thats my $0.02 on the matter.

[grazr]

I didn't want to be baited to this, but i am. I feel you kinda missed the point.

You made that remake. Just as i'm making an Avanti port. Valve didn't make that map for TF2 only for you to convert the game mode. We're not talking about porting old maps to the new game as Arena's, but simply changing the mode of an existing TF2 map to Arena. Here, there would have been no modification to the scenery or to gameplay devices, (as would have been required in bringing back a map from TFC (or any other game) to TF2) other than swapping the master entity that controls the game style.

It would be like swapping pl_goldrush track cp system with regular control points to make it a multi stage cp map, and then trying to claim credit for bringing it to the community. When really Valve did all the work. But the same goes for any other map made by any other person.


hydro:
Valve set up the lighting.
Valve made the 3dskybox.
Valve set up the spawns.
Valve assigned the spectator camera's.
Valve designed the layout.
Valve constructed the layout.
Valve set up lightmaps.
Valve set up the cubemaps.
Valve placed the props.
Valve play tested it untill it worked.
Valve designated time limits.
Valve optimised the level.
Valve clipped the level.
You swapped the game entity.

Tell me where the creativity is in that?

P.S. cz2 wasn't made by valve.

[jumpyg1258]

FYI, there has already been a remake of Avanti. You can download it here...

http://jumpyg1258.com/tf2/maps/avanti_b1.bsp.bz2

[AWESOME-O]

FYI, there has already been a remake of Avanti. You can download it here...

http://jumpyg1258.com/tf2/maps/avanti_b1.bsp.bz2

is this the fpsbanana version?
Because i hate that one

[Username]

Okay, I've got one last question. What about something like pl_dbheights? New routes and areas have been added, yet it still retains most of the areas that make dustbowl, dustbowl. I'd still say it's a remake along the lines of arena_dust or Avanti, as he changed the map to fit the mode. At the same time I still see how it's 'Valve's map'. Opinions?

[Shmitz]

I still believe it should be Valve's call on something like that, as a general case.

As a specific case, Valve already made that call when they took dustbowl's layout and copied it for goldrush. They effectively said "we think the layout can work for payload, but it needs significant changes, so we're going to create a new map rather than just modify dustbowl".

Trying to convert dustbowl to payload has always seemed obtuse and redundant to me.

[cornontheCoD]

I still believe it should be Valve's call on something like that, as a general case.

As a specific case, Valve already made that call when they took dustbowl's layout and copied it for goldrush. They effectively said "we think the layout can work for payload, but it needs significant changes, so we're going to create a new map rather than just modify dustbowl".

Trying to convert dustbowl to payload has always seemed obtuse and redundant to me.

yeah, goldrush has a very similar layout to dustbowl