Oldschool mapping VS Nowadays mapping (pros and cons)

[PrinceOfFunky]

I'm pretty sure that many of us already thought about the differences between oldschool mapping and nowadays mapping, but I'm not sure it has been discussed enough.
When I talk about it, the first thing that comes up in my mind is the use of meshes replacing the BSP geometry. I understand it is surely a big step forward since meshes are loaded lot faster than BSP geometry, but doesn't it totally change the way mappers map?
We can clearly see how nowadays mappers tend to use and reuse mesh assets, this brings level design to be made of common meshes, even entire different games share common meshes each other. It sounds monotonous and it is indeed, most of the times.
Let's suppose all stock UT99 maps were made of meshes only(no any BSP brushes), we never could have bring up edited versions of stock maps, or if we would have done it, we would have needed to recreate meshes, which is unthinkable to recreate all the whole meshes of a map.
Another thing I think about is the confusional view of a map full of details, yes it can be rly nice to see how a map has so many details to look realistic, but sometimes all those details can distract the player to focusing on the gameplay itself instead of the map details.

So, can you think of any pros and cons?

[sektor2111]

Questions:
1. You look like you don't know what happens with mesh centered out of view and not that easy to do paths over meshes, right ? Also coronas through meshes ? That is probably perfect for aiming. At a moment in my 3072 map because of a corona monster Brutus Fritz was looking like it had a shiny dick in a random moment... Do I need more meshes ?

2. OldSchool VS Nowadays ? Editor is the same, Engine is the same, BSP building is the same. RULES are the same. What are we talking about ?

[Dr.Flay]

BSP and meshes are rendered differently and have different advantages and disadvantages.
It is not a choice between old and new-school, it is a choice between optimal brush type for the correct use in the right engine.

[Eviltom]

The reason UT and a lot of older games remain classics is that they had style and charm. Older games have limits that have to be stuck to in order to make successful maps/environments. Older games also relied a LOT on gameplay.

Now modern games look amazing but are mostly interchanagble visually and gameplay is pretty bland, there are few exceptions.

For example Quake 3 and UT had very different aesthetics. But if you stuck a few giant robots in UT4 is would look like titanfall.


Oldscool mapping with bsp is like a crossword or sudoku, its a challange and everything has to be in the right place to work, modern mapping is more like gluing Lego into some tubes and boxes.

[Carbon]

The pursuit of photo-realism has a homogenizing effect on things for use. Pros and cons indeed; we have lost the unique idiosyncratic charms of the old engines but have gained....well, photo-realism.

[Hellkeeper]

So, can you think of any pros and cons?

Since how games look is subjective except in a few cases, the difference is in how you use it.
Oldschool maps were usually easier to navigate and create, but monotony was just as present with the same textures used everywhere (richrig anyone?)
New maps can be amazing but it's generally harder to distinguish the enemy and know where you can or cannot move.

[Swanky]

A lot of the current maps still look like the newbie maps 15 years ago. A lot of the pro maps still look like the pro maps 15 years ago. Maybe they had a bit more vision back then, that's all.

[papercoffee]

Fully meshed version:


BSP only version:


I don't see a huge difference in mapping back then and nowadays. Meshes make the map more appealing and detailed nothing more. The basic work is still the same. If game-play sucks won't meshes help your map.

A lot of the current maps still look like the newbie maps 15 years ago. A lot of the pro maps still look like the pro maps 15 years ago. Maybe they had a bit more vision back then, that's all.

^This... if you screw up a map, it's irrelevant if you made it with help of assets of meshes or only BSP + TheSameOldTextureEveryoneUses.

but it's generally harder to distinguish the enemy and know where you can or cannot move.

You can say the same about beginner maps from 2000 as well.
It depends on the mapper and his/her skills.

[Red_Fist]

What is weird we need (starving for) an actor to do something, like a new light effect or pathing or whatever to resolve problems of the old ways.

So now we get all the good things but you need a crew of people that only does lighting or meshes or textures.

Without the new graphics people had to make a game. what we have now is some gimmick or a "feature".
Then that is all we get, the feature, or graphic, or physics, but the game just goes from one level to the next.

So if it was me I would just make a BSP map, but use the new actors, making it a good collection of actors that resolved the old problems of the past.
But the way they made UE.... is way to much stuff to do before you even make one room, far to complicated with no scripted pawns, or game types you have to write on your own. It ruined the community and all they do is try to sell "resources" but make stupid games or one level maps.

It's cool, but not worth learning all of it to end up with needing a coder and the rest.

[sektor2111]

What is weird we need (starving for) an actor to do something, like a new light effect or pathing or whatever to resolve problems of the old ways.

All right, nowadays on debate.
While I was working at my Train map and While I was interested to develop a Train Start and a Train Stop not like HighSpeed map, I found some default stuff for a half of job and this half of job is mainly crappy enough: EarthQuake, StohasticTrigger, TimedTrigger, Dispatcher, AttachMover they simply do need external love - StochasticTrigger starts on demand but how to stop it ? Because I'm not interested to quit that easy, I simply did some stuff on purpose addressing:Killing train-quake, Killing moving sounds, killing random wheels grinding, killing random Boxes movements, and... attacking texture pan U and V in purpose to get the feeling of a stopped train when hunter reached at locomotive and killed boss (no boss yet - just a test trigger). No other dlls have been used. Simply UScript is ready for creativity and that's all about nowdays. Actually let's learn a bit of UScript and everything will be done properly and not guessing. Guessing does not helping.

Old Days: Some documentations were poorly written or never written. People were guessing a lot, some dudes with experience did good jobs for that time, others even being advanced coders were messing up packages or doing stuff and writing recommended setup as excuses for their not enough skill in writing a poor sanity checker. "warning at..." "make sure about...", and all bla bla were added for the lack of coding (or laziness...).

And draw a conclusion: As long as We have some docs and years of failures, we might have a bit of experience, to not forget Higor - you guys maybe you don't get what value has UT at this moment. Nowadays are better, this engine used wise might still deliver a lot of fun.

[Red_Fist]

On a side note, WOT has a better property changer, "property flipper" going to see if I can plant one in a map. I have all the UC.s

or make a .u

I now have the PropertyFlipper.u

Not sure if it works, but it compiled, and it must be a Legend file because it's also in Unreal2.
Only if epic gave us this years ago could have saved a lot of mapping troubles.
Now I have to see if it works, really don't see why it wouldn't, but it has a lot more to it than that propertychanger. a lot more properties and I think it will mess with collision.

[sektor2111]

Yes, that PropertyChanger is one of newer things helping nowadays UT mapping, the question is: How many mappers are understanding it ?

[Red_Fist]

Yes, that PropertyChanger is one of newer things helping nowadays UT mapping, the question is: How many mappers are understanding it ?

New thread