1.6 New maps, post your opinions.

[L[0ne]R]

I did own a few CRTs in the past, and I never noticed any significant difference between them and LCDs. Sure LCDs have a bit of a delay, but it's so insignificant I never would've noticed it if I didn't know they have delays.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Voto6njwvpY
This vid here shows the same 3D scene in 30, 60 and 1000fps. To me even the 30fps looks very much playable and nothing close to slideshow. So either you're confusing something, or you're just extremely picky. Or troll. :/

[Ymies]

if i gave a chucklewang about how the game looks i'd be playing another game

That's great, but that doesn't mean we should not improve Soldat and enhance the experience by making the maps look like something and not like horses**t. 

we should first concentrate on improving the metagame itself rather than focus on worry how much a fucking tree or a statue can enhance your gaming experience. i don't exactly know how much the mappers use time on the graphical side of the maps they create but i would say that if that time was spent on thinking how to make a map that is actually good we might already be much farther.

soldat does and will always look like horse shit and the further time passes the worse it will look in comparison. you can't avoid that fact by making maps look nice. the game is one of the most intense ones i've ever played and most players of the competitive community already curtain all polygon textures in monocolour mostly because they simply don't care. of course, in your perfect world, you can perfect your maps the way you want for them to pleasure the new people but the real issues of the game lie in every other aspect of the game but graphics. in every other aspect there is something wrong that could like seriously make the game a ton better

[DarkCrusade]

Ymies, stop pretending mappers are game developers and stop making it personal.

[Bistoufly]

I did own a few CRTs in the past, and I never noticed any significant difference between them and LCDs. Sure LCDs have a bit of a delay, but it's so insignificant I never would've noticed it if I didn't know they have delays.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Voto6njwvpY
This vid here shows the same 3D scene in 30, 60 and 1000fps. To me even the 30fps looks very much playable and nothing close to slideshow. So either you're confusing something, or you're just extremely picky. Or troll. :/

Ok lets get things straight:

1)You're linking to a youtube video.
All youtube videos are displayed at 30fps.
So don't expect to see a diference between 30fps vs 60fps or 1000fps.
There will strictly be none.

2)What I see on the video is a motion that is way too choppy to be playable.
I really don't know how you can enjoy playing like that.
For me it's a good example that shows that 30fps is unplayable.

3) re. crt's, did you try to compare between crt vs lcd. for example using clone mode? plugin the two monitors on your gpu?
Don't forget to set your crt at his max refresh rate.
if you happen to still have a crt. I'll gladly help.
I promess you will be very surprised and happy with the increase in fluidity.

4) http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html
This is for you. look at these 3 animations.
I hope this will finally convince you.

Everyone but you seems to manage fine.
It certainly is not unplayable, as you seem to think, and if it truly was, then there would be a market for that crt you are always preaching about.

Did you ever considered how tiny this market would be?
Not to mention that constructors have nothing to gain in producing crt's.
They are huge and weights a lot.
(30kg for my 21inch crt!!)

There is hope for the future tho:
The OLED technology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_light-emitting_diode

Also to make things clear I only advice CRT for Soldat.
Because Soldat low res makes it possible to set your monitor to low res and put the refresh rate to it's max.
And because when Soldat is ran on a decent modern computer, very high fps can be obtained quite easily (if v-sync is disabled ofc)
If I play a rpg like Dragon Age, I play it on my lcd. As fluidity doesn't matter in that type of games.

[machina]

4) http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html
This is for you. look at these 3 animations.
I hope this will finally convince you.

I really can't see any bigger difference between 30fps and 60fps...

[Bistoufly]

if i gave a chucklewang about how the game looks i'd be playing another game

That's great, but that doesn't mean we should not improve Soldat and enhance the experience by making the maps look like something and not like horses**t. 

we should first concentrate on improving the metagame itself rather than focus on worry how much a f**king tree or a statue can enhance your gaming experience. i don't exactly know how much the mappers use time on the graphical side of the maps they create but i would say that if that time was spent on thinking how to make a map that is actually good we might already be much farther.

soldat does and will always look like horse s**t and the further time passes the worse it will look in comparison. you can't avoid that fact by making maps look nice. the game is one of the most intense ones i've ever played and most players of the competitive community already curtain all polygon textures in monocolour mostly because they simply don't care. of course, in your perfect world, you can perfect your maps the way you want for them to pleasure the new people but the real issues of the game lie in every other aspect of the game but graphics. in every other aspect there is something wrong that could like seriously make the game a ton better

I agree with this.
And I'm one of the guy that replaced the texture with a monocolor.
And guess what it looks better. Shading must be done right tho.

My advice to mapper is to concentrate on:
-fixing polybugs
-giving a lot of possibilities for advanced movement tricks
-keeping a clear design with minimal scenery usage, smooth simple textures
-ensuring a clear contrast between background and polygons
-give visual identity to the maps ( in terms of looks and layout )

From: September 03, 2011, 05:31:47 am

4) http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html
This is for you. look at these 3 animations.
I hope this will finally convince you.

I really can't see any bigger difference between 30fps and 60fps...

That's a start. 
At least you don't think 45fps is the limit of the human eye anymore. 

[ginn]

btw: question for ginn: do you have the option "render smooth polygons" checked?
In my experience, when this option is activated it makes the fps drop significantly on maps that have lots of polygons.
For example the kampf remake is laggy compared to the original one when "render smooth polygon" is activated. But if it's not activated, kampf and kampf-remake get similar fps.

btw2: It's true that fps in Soldat are very unstable. So at the moment you need extra fps to compensate this issue.

yeah, I use "render smooth polygons", but I don't really have an issue with fps.

And yes :p, 30fps is too low... I tried limiting my fps to 60, but for some reason it felt lower, and it became completely unplayable. But when I tried limiting it to 65, and it was alright... it still felt weird for some reason, but that might be because of the widescreen.
I guess you can get used to anything, but once you're used to something it'll take some time to get used to something else.

The big difference between LCD and CRT is that LCD got motion blur (between each frame), which makes having lower fps not looking as choppy as if you were using an CRT.

[ramirez]

Most modern LCD monitors only render at 60hz, so you'll be seeing maximum of 60 frames per second anyways. It doesn't matter if the FPS of the game is 300 or 600 since you'll only be seeing 60 frames since that's how fast your monitor can draw.

[machina]

Most modern LCD monitors only render at 60hz, so you'll be seeing maximum of 60 frames per second anyways. It doesn't matter if the FPS of the game is 300 or 600 since you'll only be seeing 60 frames since that's how fast your monitor can draw.

True... So i don't agree why so many people cry about it so much...

[Colonel ONeill]

because those people who already has 60 FPS (like me) will see the FPS get down to 30, which is unplayable...
I even can't play the actual Divi -.-

[DarkCrusade]

Well, that's not a problem of the maps but rather of the bad coding. Any programmer would get a Soldat-ish thing running with the current maps and have it not lag..

[chutem]

Everyone but you seems to manage fine.
It certainly is not unplayable, as you seem to think, and if it truly was, then there would be a market for that crt you are always preaching about.

Did you ever considered how tiny this market would be?

It definately isn't tiny. If there was really as much difference as you say, every professional gamer, and people that want to be as good as possible would be using them. The market for gamers is not tiny, just look at all those gaming mice being sold. If there really was an advantage, people wouldn't care about the extra weight.

[L[0ne]R]

1)You're linking to a youtube video.
All youtube videos are displayed at 30fps.
So don't expect to see a diference between 30fps vs 60fps or 1000fps.
There will strictly be none.

Yeah, the main reason I linked to the vid is to at least show an example of 30 fps.

2)What I see on the video is a motion that is way too choppy to be playable.
I really don't know how you can enjoy playing like that.
For me it's a good example that shows that 30fps is unplayable.

On my crappy computer I consider it a luxury to have over 30 fps even in a 4-year-old game. I play Battlefield Play4Free which just barely hits the 30fps mark. It doesn't feel nearly as smooth as 60fps, but it doesn't prevent me from killing stuff and being at the top of the scoreboard.

3) re. crt's, did you try to compare between crt vs lcd. for example using clone mode? plugin the two monitors on your gpu?
Don't forget to set your crt at his max refresh rate.
if you happen to still have a crt. I'll gladly help.
I promess you will be very surprised and happy with the increase in fluidity.

No, I didn't go that far to compare the two. I know there is a difference, but if I don't notice it with the naked eye - I don't see the point in all that testing. :/

4) http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html
This is for you. look at these 3 animations.
I hope this will finally convince you.

I admit, this shows the difference quite clearly, but the only reason I noticed it is because there are 3 different examples shown side-by-side. If the examples were on separate pages - it'd take me some effort to notice the difference between 30 and 60.

I tried limiting my FPS to 30 in Soldat and it did get noticeably choppier, but I think it might be the buggy FPS limiter. I limited FPS to 30, in-game counter showed stable 41, but the game itself ran at about 20-25.

I still think that 30fps is more than playable, at least for most games. I'm not 100% sure how it is for games like Soldat or Quake since I couldn't actually test those myself, but from what I can see on youtube videos (since you say they're no more than 30 fps) - even quake 3 seems just fine with 30 fps. Again - 60fps is definitely better, but no way 30 fps is unplayable.. I'm sure 90% of gamers would agree.

[Ymies]

Ymies, stop pretending mappers are game developers and stop making it personal.

how am i making it personal if i'm merely expressing my opinion on what should be done to make the game better, especially when the mappers that i'm referring to ARE devs. do you even have a clue on what's going on in here anyway? that's pretty much how meaningful your arguments are

[DarkCrusade]

You might have noticed, but the new Kampf is by me. And fine, I am a dev myself then. And what's does a dev want? A dev wants that the player has the best experience. I do not work on Soldat's code, but I do maps. For me, it's important to make a map focussing on 2 different parts: A) Layout and B) Style. Every mapper has his own style, and mine is to create a dense atmosphere. Most of my maps are dark, polygons fade to black etc. ctf_Kampf has proven that it has a very well working layout, so all I did was remake the map from the beginning but without any polybugs and better visuals. Why nice visuals and not plain polygons so you can enjoy your 600 FPS? Well, because it makes more fun to play maps that look individual and somehow have a theme. Gamemodes like TW or Missionmod would absolutly suck with plain polygons, and imo, all other gamemodes would as well. There are a lot of new maps which I dislike (Snakebite, Viet, Ruins etc.), but since we are talking about new maps in general I'll just ignore these.

If you can't see the reason for me to argue with you, and what meaning my arguments have, then it's you who should go back to the kindergarten. At least not me.

[Ymies]

what? i'm not telling anyone to reattend kindergarten here, the only issue with any of your thinking is that you don't seem to understand that it's the mere playability that has been carrying this game for its nearly 10 years of life. unless you can make something absolutely beautiful happen i would still be stubborn about my opinion and say that it cannot save this game

when you look at the current list of ctf maps for example, you can clearly see a pattern. 90% of the most popular maps have been made by veteran players and players who have once been at the top of understanding the competitive side of the game. that's what matters, you can keep working on other gamemodes aswell i'm not trying to keep that from anyone, but you simply can't deny the fact that ctf has been 95% of all soldat for at least the past 8 years. that i can say with confidence. upon creating these maps the people clearly thought to themselves how they could make a good map, not just a random pile of polygons that looks nice to eye because most people who play this game don't give a damn about the graphics

i don't really know who you are or if you even play the game itself but i would encourage you to not argue about stuff like this if you don't like playing this game competently, because that's the best resource of new players this game has and will apparently ever have

about your arguments, i think it's clear that you think too much and too complicated. kampf for example is a map that is far less liked in comparison to the popular maps and is hardly ever played in leagues, which is a good indicator about a map. if you then state that looking at the old version of the map makes you sick, i could almost say that you proved my point before you started arguing with me

now, before i continue arguing about arguing with you i'd like to return to the actual point in this topic, which is the remakes. a remake is good when it's made of a map that does not work or support the concept of the game. a map like run is far too slow-paced for a game like this because it's so big. now if you remake it along with a bunch of other maps i would consider it appropriate to say that you shouldn't screw over their original principles just to desperately attempt to make them more popular. i'm not saying that you were the mapper in this case but you do see how similar maps like ruins, lanubya and mayapan are with one another, don't you? this detail in particular just doesn't make sense. especially as it's not the only example amongst the remakes

[Poop]

I am left here wondering if there was actually a point to this thread, since I don't see any changes to the mappack from 1.6rc to 1.6. (Atleast in the ctf maps).

In this thread its pretty clear that the community did not like the snakebite or viet remakes, and I also saw alot of people having issues with ctf_Scorpian. All of those maps are included.

Other than that:

Good job guys, happy to see some serious progress over the last month with this dev team. 2 release candidates and a release in the same month is pretty impressive considering what most of us are used to.

Hopefully more of the same to come.

[ginn]

I am left here wondering if there was actually a point to this thread, since I don't see any changes to the mappack from 1.6rc to 1.6. (Atleast in the ctf maps).

In this thread its pretty clear that the community did not like the snakebite or viet remakes, and I also saw alot of people having issues with ctf_Scorpian. All of those maps are included.

Other than that:

Good job guys, happy to see some serious progress over the last month with this dev team. 2 release candidates and a release in the same month is pretty impressive considering what most of us are used to.

Hopefully more of the same to come.

I'm left here wondering why you didn't read the 1.6RC thread.

[Bait]]

Viet and snake are fucked

[Blacksheepboy]

No seriously, this game cannot be ''looking good'' give up on that.

you're pretty right. rats in CS.. versus de_dust. de_dust was CS, rats wasn't (3D layout.. apples/oranges); rats was hella fun tho, dunno about 'important' matches on it