All of my maps are widely popular. Complexity is irrelevant. You just applied philosophies for development that has nothing to do with custom maps. An oil painting is not a custom map. A full movie is not a custom map. You exhibit the same flaw I described above.
boring argumentation
What do you know of oil paintings? What do you feel is the point of your argumentation? What do you know about philo? What's your point besides "other people who see things differently are inferior"?
(this coming from someone who does feel the experience is what's most important, that's to say i agree that "jumping around" at first is best (until you know what you need and can start doing it properly)) ...
Only thing you seem to be saying: mememememmemememememememememememememememememe
I guess my style is bit closer to Vexal than others.
When I start to work in new map, for example THE Card Game in the past. First thing almost I usually do is to open up trigger editor and start trigger away. Also I can plan almost entire thing in my head without writing anything of it down beforehand and then it evolves while I work with my map. In fact, THE Card Game never was planned beforehand at least outside of my head.
I don't generally use comments or notes about stuff, I memorize trigger side of map rather easily and be able to keep editing it over time.
Thats the thing. Not all successful artists do as you say, either now or in the past - but some do.
It also depends on what level you're doing it at. If you're doing it for fun, as a hobby, you want care what "Philosophy" goes into your picture. That doesn't mean your picture looks bad. (If the drawer has enough technical skill)
See what I'm saying?
Anyways, I support planning - I'm just often too lazy to do it with things I'm just doing for fun. =)
Yeh, I agree if you do something for hobby you just go straight forward no matter what result you get. I tend to have a deal with larger projects so my workflow involves too much to be able to work without planning :) therefore I project the same approach to smaller tasks.
In my opinion the more professional a person gets the more well thought his work becomes. The younger (not by age, but by experience) person is the more relaxed he is in terms of this kind of work.
Yeh, I agree if you do something for hobby you just go straight forward no matter what result you get. I tend to have a deal with larger projects so my workflow involves too much to be able to work without planning :) therefore I project the same approach to smaller tasks. In my opinion the more professional a person gets the more well thought his work becomes. The younger (not by age, but by experience) person is the more relaxed he is in terms of this kind of work.
I might be reading you completely wrong, but are you (perhaps unknowingly) bringing up the philosophical argument that young people have the enthousiasm but lack the experience (and thus have the "sod it, I'm gonna make this shit" mentality) while old people have the experience but lack the enthousiasm (and thus have the "I've got a brilliant idea all thought out, but I guess I misthought somewhere so I'd better not make this" mentality)?
If so, my hat goes off to you sir, that's a good point you're making that's both valid to the discussion and something I hadn't considered yet.
Yeh, I agree if you do something for hobby you just go straight forward no matter what result you get. I tend to have a deal with larger projects so my workflow involves too much to be able to work without planning :) therefore I project the same approach to smaller tasks. In my opinion the more professional a person gets the more well thought his work becomes. The younger (not by age, but by experience) person is the more relaxed he is in terms of this kind of work.
Well, again, I think its best to do planning as well. (For one thing, its a lot less risky, and its a must if you work with other people)
Really I think I said all I needed to say on my first post on the first page. =P I was just replying to things other people said because they brought up valid points.
For an example: If your doing it as a hobby it doesn't matter as much. And, if you HAVE to follow a plan (in general) - that is a flaw, because there are times in life you'll have to make choices on the fly, whether you like it or not, and if you can't you'll mess up.
Things usually go best with planning though, like it or not. xD
EDIT: Would also like to point out that order of operations (Data -> Triggers -> Terrain, ect) is NOT the same thing as planning.
I might be reading you completely wrong, but are you (perhaps unknowingly) bringing up the philosophical argument that young people have the enthousiasm but lack the experience (and thus have the "sod it, I'm gonna make this shit" mentality) while old people have the experience but lack the enthousiasm (and thus have the "I've got a brilliant idea all thought out, but I guess I misthought somewhere so I'd better not make this" mentality)?
If so, my hat goes off to you sir, that's a good point you're making that's both valid to the discussion and something I hadn't considered yet.
Hm... Not exactly but close. When you lack experience you go like "wow, that idea is freaking badass, Im gonna make it right now!" and rarely oriented towards result. With experience you involve alot more planning to be sure that the result will be cool. But in the same time you may lack motivation when it comes to things you are not sure about or don't have enough knowledge and experience in.
I would personally work on the core gameplay first. In the case of a TD, that would be the first level. Make one tower, one wave of enemies, and the terrain. If that single wave is fun, make another wave, another tower, and so on. Complex maps that work start out as simple maps that work, not complex maps that don't work. That's how I'm working on my map.
In the maps I've worked on, I've started with just a blank terrain and stuck with that for a long time as I worked out the core mechanics, mainly data objects but adding triggers as needed (just plopping down any units you need for testing). I've been using terrain in my current project as a break from everything else. It's nice to just sit back and paint some textures instead of going into rage as your new abilities and mechanics continue to present new and exciting problems.
As for planning, I had a notepad document where I put all my ideas right at the start. Most of it actually ended up in the game, which is pretty cool, along with some extras that I came up with along the way.
For example, the guy who said he studies film and has to plan everything. To me, it looks like he's wasting his time planning everything. A very small number of people will even see it.
That's not really an argument for your point though? I can come into most of the things you've said earlier on, but you just said "Custom maps to game design are coloring books to art.". All I'm saying is that that's not right. With the way mapping has evolved it is more a case of "custom maps to game design are sketches to paintings". The whole thing has absolutely nothing to do with how many people will ever see the painting.
Honestly, getting something playable quickly is key from the standpoint of motivating yourself to keep working on it. You don't get paid for making maps in this game and unless you really love the challenges of some particular aspect of map making, you're better off trying to get results quickly then making a gigantic plan and trying to piece everything together at the end. Even if you were getting paid, you want your map to be in testable condition quickly from a debugging and design standpoint(it's much easier to debug or make a design decision when you know everything but the last thing you changed or added is working as intended).
On the subject of planning though, you should always have a short term plan for getting your current task to work and another plan for modifying it to be extensible(if you feel it is something that you're going to need to build on). It might be helpful to have a long term plan, but you shouldn't adhere rigidly to it. Use what works in practice, not what works in theory. Planning is hard(p-space hard in fact :P (the :P is so those of you who actually understand this don't think my lame pun is serious and lash out at me)) so don't expect to come up with a good one for anything large-scale. I'm not really sure why this has turned into a huge argument (I guess Vexal is just obnoxious?).
How many people do you think play each one? The most popular map right now on NA has about 10k bookmarks. I don't think that's a lot.
SotIS broke 10k but I've seen as many as 13k. Either way I consider it a good amount. I mean how many active players regularly play a typical Kongregate game? Even many big-budget online games don't have that kind of player base.
boring argumentation
What do you know of oil paintings? What do you feel is the point of your argumentation? What do you know about philo? What's your point besides "other people who see things differently are inferior"?
(this coming from someone who does feel the experience is what's most important, that's to say i agree that "jumping around" at first is best (until you know what you need and can start doing it properly)) ...
Only thing you seem to be saying: mememememmemememememememememememememememememe
so yeah...
boring
On topic:
@op:
the greatest way to find where you are at, what you would like to spend your galaxy on:
visit other mapmakers mods with said mapmakeer showcasing their stuff
(while overlooking several of their precious "dirty secrets")
ask Vexal for a tour
;)
I guess my style is bit closer to Vexal than others.
When I start to work in new map, for example THE Card Game in the past. First thing almost I usually do is to open up trigger editor and start trigger away. Also I can plan almost entire thing in my head without writing anything of it down beforehand and then it evolves while I work with my map. In fact, THE Card Game never was planned beforehand at least outside of my head.
I don't generally use comments or notes about stuff, I memorize trigger side of map rather easily and be able to keep editing it over time.
Yeh, I agree if you do something for hobby you just go straight forward no matter what result you get. I tend to have a deal with larger projects so my workflow involves too much to be able to work without planning :) therefore I project the same approach to smaller tasks. In my opinion the more professional a person gets the more well thought his work becomes. The younger (not by age, but by experience) person is the more relaxed he is in terms of this kind of work.
I might be reading you completely wrong, but are you (perhaps unknowingly) bringing up the philosophical argument that young people have the enthousiasm but lack the experience (and thus have the "sod it, I'm gonna make this shit" mentality) while old people have the experience but lack the enthousiasm (and thus have the "I've got a brilliant idea all thought out, but I guess I misthought somewhere so I'd better not make this" mentality)?
If so, my hat goes off to you sir, that's a good point you're making that's both valid to the discussion and something I hadn't considered yet.
Well, again, I think its best to do planning as well. (For one thing, its a lot less risky, and its a must if you work with other people)
Really I think I said all I needed to say on my first post on the first page. =P I was just replying to things other people said because they brought up valid points.
For an example: If your doing it as a hobby it doesn't matter as much. And, if you HAVE to follow a plan (in general) - that is a flaw, because there are times in life you'll have to make choices on the fly, whether you like it or not, and if you can't you'll mess up.
Things usually go best with planning though, like it or not. xD
EDIT: Would also like to point out that order of operations (Data -> Triggers -> Terrain, ect) is NOT the same thing as planning.
Hm... Not exactly but close. When you lack experience you go like "wow, that idea is freaking badass, Im gonna make it right now!" and rarely oriented towards result. With experience you involve alot more planning to be sure that the result will be cool. But in the same time you may lack motivation when it comes to things you are not sure about or don't have enough knowledge and experience in.
I would personally work on the core gameplay first. In the case of a TD, that would be the first level. Make one tower, one wave of enemies, and the terrain. If that single wave is fun, make another wave, another tower, and so on. Complex maps that work start out as simple maps that work, not complex maps that don't work. That's how I'm working on my map.
In the maps I've worked on, I've started with just a blank terrain and stuck with that for a long time as I worked out the core mechanics, mainly data objects but adding triggers as needed (just plopping down any units you need for testing). I've been using terrain in my current project as a break from everything else. It's nice to just sit back and paint some textures instead of going into rage as your new abilities and mechanics continue to present new and exciting problems.
As for planning, I had a notepad document where I put all my ideas right at the start. Most of it actually ended up in the game, which is pretty cool, along with some extras that I came up with along the way.
Everyone takes custom map design too seriously.
Custom maps to game design are coloring books to art.
I would've agreed with you if this was the Warcraft 2 editor. The GE allows for so much options that the line is actually a lot thinner than that.
@Mozared: Go
The audience for a custom map appears small.
How many people do you think play each one? The most popular map right now on NA has about 10k bookmarks. I don't think that's a lot.
How does the size of the audience say anything at all about how similar the process of custom mapping is to the process of designing a game?
@Mozared: Go
For example, the guy who said he studies film and has to plan everything. To me, it looks like he's wasting his time planning everything. A very small number of people will even see it.
That's not really an argument for your point though? I can come into most of the things you've said earlier on, but you just said "Custom maps to game design are coloring books to art.". All I'm saying is that that's not right. With the way mapping has evolved it is more a case of "custom maps to game design are sketches to paintings". The whole thing has absolutely nothing to do with how many people will ever see the painting.
@Mozared: Go
I concede the previous analogy, then. But everything else I said in this thread I stand by.
Honestly, getting something playable quickly is key from the standpoint of motivating yourself to keep working on it. You don't get paid for making maps in this game and unless you really love the challenges of some particular aspect of map making, you're better off trying to get results quickly then making a gigantic plan and trying to piece everything together at the end. Even if you were getting paid, you want your map to be in testable condition quickly from a debugging and design standpoint(it's much easier to debug or make a design decision when you know everything but the last thing you changed or added is working as intended).
On the subject of planning though, you should always have a short term plan for getting your current task to work and another plan for modifying it to be extensible(if you feel it is something that you're going to need to build on). It might be helpful to have a long term plan, but you shouldn't adhere rigidly to it. Use what works in practice, not what works in theory. Planning is hard(p-space hard in fact :P (the :P is so those of you who actually understand this don't think my lame pun is serious and lash out at me)) so don't expect to come up with a good one for anything large-scale. I'm not really sure why this has turned into a huge argument (I guess Vexal is just obnoxious?).
@Catalisk: Go
"(I guess Vexal is just obnoxious?)"
Guessing has no place in logic argument.
SotIS broke 10k but I've seen as many as 13k. Either way I consider it a good amount. I mean how many active players regularly play a typical Kongregate game? Even many big-budget online games don't have that kind of player base.
I remember Blizzard saying something similar when they spoke about their custom maps. It must be true!