Work in progress, going to add a few more doodads (decals) in and around each area, but I think it's more or less finished. Playable area is: 62x56, lighting is Mar Sara Night Test.
Features:
Two elevated team areas, red/blue (easily changed)
Sunken central area w/ possible environmental trap(s)
Sunken corner areas w/ possible environmental trap(s) or bonuses... top left is the biohazard leak area (as seen in screenshots below), bottom right is blast crater area
Lots to look at, lots to hide behind, shouldn't be too laggy
This is cool rrowland, I might do something up if I have time later.
EDIT: Oh, is that camera view you listed the default or should I create a camera for testing purposes? And if I do make a submission, my initial thought was to mix tilesets, is that OK or will that create a problem for the larger map?
...but why should we be cold? And how can you judge a person's usefulness by one incident? This assumes people have no redeemable qualities? What if he serves his time, rehabilitates and then spends his twilight years speaking to young Muslims about the dangers of fundamentalism?
I know a guy (read his story) who did a total of 26 years for murder in Canada, and turned his life around. You would never guess that this guy did any kind of a bid like that, nor that he was once known as "the meanest man in prison." Point is: reform is possible, even in the worst cases.
I don't really understand your reply... who is playing God? Wouldn't you be playing God by deciding when he dies now as opposed to letting him pass through natural causes?
I understand what you're saying, and I actually agree to a point. My entire outlook on life is somewhat based around this principle, I think a lot of people's lives are, that's what keeps us sane. However, if you have the ability to create positive change, isn't it good to do so? I would argue that we always do, even in small ways... ie: this thread is bringing awareness to the injustices of this case, which in my opinion is basically a revenge trial steeped in racism and prejudice.
The US government doesn't have to care but that's just the point, that's why there are people willing to leak documents to Wikileaks, and snitch to reporters and whatnot... because someone needs to account for the crimes.
And the Canadian government actually does want Khadr back, just not the right part of the government. Harper's conservatives are ruining this fuckin country, seriously.
Part of the reason I wanted to start a discussion about this was to bring awareness to it. If you're not familiar with the case, it's not quite the same as the case against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed...
Omar's father brought him to Afghanistan as a 15 year old boy, which is when he was captured. He allegedly threw the grenade which killed the medic. He has been imprisoned in Gitmo for 8 years, so far without sentencing... he's been allegedly abused (what some would consider tortured.)
I have a number of issues with this case and I've followed it nearly from the beginning... but my biggest issues are:
he was 15 when it happened, even if he's proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt this must be considered, as it would be in any other "murder" situation and also has many many precedents when considering the use of child soldiers. Besides this, how smart were you at 15? Were you impressionable and naive? Were you easily swayed? Probably, like the rest of us.
again, if he is guilty, he is merely guilty of killing a soldier (albeit a medic) in a warzone and while this may sound callous, all soldiers who go to war know the risks involved, don't victimize them... how many other coalition troops have died and no one else is held to account, how many AFGHANS (civilians or military) have been killed, and no NATO troops are being held up on murder charges?
And the last thing I'll say is that trials and the goings on at Gitmo are shady at best. If we are actually committed to the rule of law and equal justice, he'll be given a fair trial with all the evidence in Canada, as he's a Canadian citizen.
So... I'm sure this isn't the proper forum to be having political discussions on, but I know there are a lot of intelligent people on these forums from all over the world, so I thought I'd see where everyone's at on this.
If you're not familiar with Omar Khadr, he's a Canadian-Afghan who:
Quote:
...in October 2010, pleaded guilty to the five charges against him, including murder and supporting terrorism in Afghanistan, as part of a plea agreement with prosecutors at the U.S. military commission at Guantanamo Bay. He was captured on July 27, 2002 by American forces at the age of 15 following a four-hour firefight in the village of Ayub Kheyl, Afghanistan. He has spent seven years in the Guantanamo Bay detention camps accused of war crimes and providing support to terrorism after throwing a grenade that killed a US soldier.
Of course you don't have to worry about being banned because you didn't pay for your copy of the game.
Anyone who argues against what you're saying isn't necessarily a fanboy... frankly just sick of seeing a decent amount of unrelated threads turn into this kind of thing because of ...well, you. And it's not a case of simply not joining the threads, because I could probably quote you from any number of threads trolling incendiary remarks.
Should we just ignore you instead? I think that's a better solution.
Seriously though do you not have a day job or a girlfriend or something? You really need to check yourself. Maybe go outside, get some fresh air, read a newspaper, see what else is going on in the world. The situation on Battle.net 2.0 really isn't this important. They've already heard from thousands of upset customers, hopefully they fix it. If they don't, it's just a game.
If we did anything along these lines, i think a better idea would be to make actual playable maps that last 5-10 minutes with 2-4 players, make a LOT of those maps, all different though, but have all use the same bank file, get players to actually gain points for each game they finish, and give them a good reason to play again: more points unlock stuff.
If we did something like that, where there are actual fun maps to play, there is absolutely no reason to ban us - we provided short good maps that coincidentally took up the first 2 pages of bnet AND mock the popularity system.
Of course, every map will have mockeries of the popularity system in every way possible. I think the name "popularity wars" should be in each map with an appropriate suffix :)
some ideas:
very short TD, tower upgrades are unlocked by "popularity wars points", and spawns are increased accordingly
Some Hero-based maps (defenses, wars, etc.) in which your hero is saved, and gets ability/talents/items based on the PWP (popularity wars points)
A tug map, which again gives bonuses for PWP
Better still, instead of 5-10 minute maps, why not make them last 15-25 minutes? We could also integrate upgrades, the player could choose different heroes... possibly create unlockable heroes the more times you play.
I wouldn't mind the popularity system if it were a side feature of the old system.
I'm not an expert on dedicated servers and whatnot, and I can only imagine this is probably asking a lot, but is it unfeasible to have players creating our games on their servers, as with the old system? Would that create too many variables in terms of security, spam, duplicates, etc? (evidently they've found a reason not to do it)
You know now you think about it, this is the same thing Activision did with COD:MW2 for all platforms. They removed the lobby system for a more streamlined dedicated server list... you just choose the type of game you want to play and the system chooses the server for you.
Maybe all this anger is misdirected. After all, the same thing has happened to Infinity Ward, and they caught a lot of flak for this. Especially on PC where a lobby system is expected for games like that...
You're not "speaking out against this shit", you're annoying people on a forum. Why don't you protest at BlizzCon, or write them emails, or do something productive. How is irritating a dozen or so people on a web forum helping your cause? You're just a negative person, far as I can tell.
lol Tug games are certainly not the best SC2 can offer, but there's more to the SC2 community than some of the elitists around here. On this website alone there are dozens of really well made maps, which may never make it to the top of the popularity system but that's to be expected... I'm saying that of the million people who play daily, it's not surprising that on average, tug games are at the top... or any game which is short, easy to pick up, and easy to play again.
I have no stats to go on, but I would guess there are many many more casual gamers who just want to sit down for a 30 minute game and not have to be immersed in a mind numbing story, or complicated rules or whatever. This is not WC3, this does not have the exact same market as WC3, it will probably never have SC1 or WC3's battle.net system. Get off it.
EDIT: You know what, I'm out. lol It's self-defeating to sit here and argue about this. I'm not trying to say the system doesn't have its flaws... but they've been bitched about ad nauseum. We get it. Let's talk about it when/if it changes.
I'm excited to try the new Blizzard maps for a few reasons. Mainly because Blizzard maps are highly polished before they're released because they have different departments working on different sections (ie: art, models, sounds, terrain, data editing, etc) and because I can't wait to open them up. When you have a team of people working on maps like that cohesively (in a paid setting or at the very least in a LAN setting where they can communicate quickly) the maps tend to be far more well-rounded. Not to mention Blizzard as an organization has a lot more relative experience in game design than most people here... since that's literally all they do. They should be awesome, at least to look at. :)
Your replies in this thread have been pretty much tired and predictable.
On Battle.net there are no "real" maps as you say, because that isn't what the vast majority of players are playing. That seems obvious. If Desert Strike or Nexus Wars are popular maps, it's not for nothing. Instead of whining about the lack of substance in the maps, why not have a look at what's popular, try to understand why and then attempt to add those things into your maps?
Seems to me on average, if a game takes more than 40 minutes, it probably will not be played. If it is poorly explained or hard to pick up and play for first timers (as they explained in the video - you have about 2 minutes to give first timers the rundown before they ragequit your game), it won't be around very long. If it has very little replay value, or really any variation in gameplay or strategy, it won't be played twice. Say what you want about the most popular games on Battle.net, but these are things that all of those maps have.
And if Blizzard didn't care about their community, they wouldn't have taken 10 years to put out a sequel, or another year and a half to put out the expansion to the sequel. If they wanted money, they would be churning them out like Microsoft and patching up the mistakes as they go. I think the fact that they have things like BlizzCon and map contests and constant patches and online moderation and periodic account bans for cheaters, etc etc shows that they pay attention to the community. True, they ignored the friction that the popularity system created, but you can't win every battle...
Just because they make money and choose to take their game in the direction that they think is best doesn't mean that they're an evil corporation out to fuck over the customers. If you have such a problem with them, the best way to express that is to stop buying their product, stop using their product, stop producing maps for their product. But please stop bitching about how bad they are because no one wants to constantly hear the rants of one bitter individual, least of all, Blizzard.
EDIT: Oh, and also, why make maps? There are massive communities outside of Battle.net (as some of the designers said) that will play, test or critique your map... you can circumvent the popularity system that way. Battle.net 2.0 is not really designed for massive RPG or storytelling maps... for the reasons listed above. So why make these kinds of maps? I dunno, cause the process is fun? Because if you were just doing it to get famous or whatever that is, you're ...psychologically damaged?
I think you need to come down to reality. This is a video game.
"Big brother" Blizzard is oppressing its map-making community by not allowing them to post whatever content they want without consequences? If you don't want to play games with vulgar obscenities, don't join them? This is about "freedom"?
I also have a pretty ridonk gaming laptop (all settings on either High or Ultra) but no video editing software... however if you need screens done, give me a shout!
0
Work in progress, going to add a few more doodads (decals) in and around each area, but I think it's more or less finished. Playable area is: 62x56, lighting is Mar Sara Night Test.
Features:
Feedback!
0
This is cool rrowland, I might do something up if I have time later.
EDIT: Oh, is that camera view you listed the default or should I create a camera for testing purposes? And if I do make a submission, my initial thought was to mix tilesets, is that OK or will that create a problem for the larger map?
0
@Mozared: Go
...but why should we be cold? And how can you judge a person's usefulness by one incident? This assumes people have no redeemable qualities? What if he serves his time, rehabilitates and then spends his twilight years speaking to young Muslims about the dangers of fundamentalism?
I know a guy (read his story) who did a total of 26 years for murder in Canada, and turned his life around. You would never guess that this guy did any kind of a bid like that, nor that he was once known as "the meanest man in prison." Point is: reform is possible, even in the worst cases.
@BumpInTheNight: Go
That's harsh, no? You see him as an animal then? Also I don't understand your last comment.
0
@Mozared: Go
I don't really understand your reply... who is playing God? Wouldn't you be playing God by deciding when he dies now as opposed to letting him pass through natural causes?
@EternalWraith: Go
I understand what you're saying, and I actually agree to a point. My entire outlook on life is somewhat based around this principle, I think a lot of people's lives are, that's what keeps us sane. However, if you have the ability to create positive change, isn't it good to do so? I would argue that we always do, even in small ways... ie: this thread is bringing awareness to the injustices of this case, which in my opinion is basically a revenge trial steeped in racism and prejudice.
@s3rius: Go
It was a bit of a rhetorical question lol
The US government doesn't have to care but that's just the point, that's why there are people willing to leak documents to Wikileaks, and snitch to reporters and whatnot... because someone needs to account for the crimes.
And the Canadian government actually does want Khadr back, just not the right part of the government. Harper's conservatives are ruining this fuckin country, seriously.
0
@Mozared: Go
Part of the reason I wanted to start a discussion about this was to bring awareness to it. If you're not familiar with the case, it's not quite the same as the case against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed...
Omar's father brought him to Afghanistan as a 15 year old boy, which is when he was captured. He allegedly threw the grenade which killed the medic. He has been imprisoned in Gitmo for 8 years, so far without sentencing... he's been allegedly abused (what some would consider tortured.)
I have a number of issues with this case and I've followed it nearly from the beginning... but my biggest issues are:
And the last thing I'll say is that trials and the goings on at Gitmo are shady at best. If we are actually committed to the rule of law and equal justice, he'll be given a fair trial with all the evidence in Canada, as he's a Canadian citizen.
But that won't happen.
0
So... I'm sure this isn't the proper forum to be having political discussions on, but I know there are a lot of intelligent people on these forums from all over the world, so I thought I'd see where everyone's at on this.
If you're not familiar with Omar Khadr, he's a Canadian-Afghan who:
If you've been following the case, what are your thoughts on the recent developments?
0
@Colt556: Go
Of course you don't have to worry about being banned because you didn't pay for your copy of the game.
Anyone who argues against what you're saying isn't necessarily a fanboy... frankly just sick of seeing a decent amount of unrelated threads turn into this kind of thing because of ...well, you. And it's not a case of simply not joining the threads, because I could probably quote you from any number of threads trolling incendiary remarks.
Should we just ignore you instead? I think that's a better solution.
Seriously though do you not have a day job or a girlfriend or something? You really need to check yourself. Maybe go outside, get some fresh air, read a newspaper, see what else is going on in the world. The situation on Battle.net 2.0 really isn't this important. They've already heard from thousands of upset customers, hopefully they fix it. If they don't, it's just a game.
Breathe brother, just breathe.
0
@SouLCarveRR: Go
roger that
0
Better still, instead of 5-10 minute maps, why not make them last 15-25 minutes? We could also integrate upgrades, the player could choose different heroes... possibly create unlockable heroes the more times you play.
Oh, wait......
this is ridiculous. lol
0
viva la revolucion.....................
0
I wouldn't mind the popularity system if it were a side feature of the old system.
I'm not an expert on dedicated servers and whatnot, and I can only imagine this is probably asking a lot, but is it unfeasible to have players creating our games on their servers, as with the old system? Would that create too many variables in terms of security, spam, duplicates, etc? (evidently they've found a reason not to do it)
You know now you think about it, this is the same thing Activision did with COD:MW2 for all platforms. They removed the lobby system for a more streamlined dedicated server list... you just choose the type of game you want to play and the system chooses the server for you.
Maybe all this anger is misdirected. After all, the same thing has happened to Infinity Ward, and they caught a lot of flak for this. Especially on PC where a lobby system is expected for games like that...
0
@Colt556: Go
qq
You're not "speaking out against this shit", you're annoying people on a forum. Why don't you protest at BlizzCon, or write them emails, or do something productive. How is irritating a dozen or so people on a web forum helping your cause? You're just a negative person, far as I can tell.
@zenx1: Go
lol Tug games are certainly not the best SC2 can offer, but there's more to the SC2 community than some of the elitists around here. On this website alone there are dozens of really well made maps, which may never make it to the top of the popularity system but that's to be expected... I'm saying that of the million people who play daily, it's not surprising that on average, tug games are at the top... or any game which is short, easy to pick up, and easy to play again.
I have no stats to go on, but I would guess there are many many more casual gamers who just want to sit down for a 30 minute game and not have to be immersed in a mind numbing story, or complicated rules or whatever. This is not WC3, this does not have the exact same market as WC3, it will probably never have SC1 or WC3's battle.net system. Get off it.
EDIT: You know what, I'm out. lol It's self-defeating to sit here and argue about this. I'm not trying to say the system doesn't have its flaws... but they've been bitched about ad nauseum. We get it. Let's talk about it when/if it changes.
0
@zeldarules28: Go
I'm excited to try the new Blizzard maps for a few reasons. Mainly because Blizzard maps are highly polished before they're released because they have different departments working on different sections (ie: art, models, sounds, terrain, data editing, etc) and because I can't wait to open them up. When you have a team of people working on maps like that cohesively (in a paid setting or at the very least in a LAN setting where they can communicate quickly) the maps tend to be far more well-rounded. Not to mention Blizzard as an organization has a lot more relative experience in game design than most people here... since that's literally all they do. They should be awesome, at least to look at. :)
@Colt556: Go
Your replies in this thread have been pretty much tired and predictable.
On Battle.net there are no "real" maps as you say, because that isn't what the vast majority of players are playing. That seems obvious. If Desert Strike or Nexus Wars are popular maps, it's not for nothing. Instead of whining about the lack of substance in the maps, why not have a look at what's popular, try to understand why and then attempt to add those things into your maps?
Seems to me on average, if a game takes more than 40 minutes, it probably will not be played. If it is poorly explained or hard to pick up and play for first timers (as they explained in the video - you have about 2 minutes to give first timers the rundown before they ragequit your game), it won't be around very long. If it has very little replay value, or really any variation in gameplay or strategy, it won't be played twice. Say what you want about the most popular games on Battle.net, but these are things that all of those maps have.
And if Blizzard didn't care about their community, they wouldn't have taken 10 years to put out a sequel, or another year and a half to put out the expansion to the sequel. If they wanted money, they would be churning them out like Microsoft and patching up the mistakes as they go. I think the fact that they have things like BlizzCon and map contests and constant patches and online moderation and periodic account bans for cheaters, etc etc shows that they pay attention to the community. True, they ignored the friction that the popularity system created, but you can't win every battle...
Just because they make money and choose to take their game in the direction that they think is best doesn't mean that they're an evil corporation out to fuck over the customers. If you have such a problem with them, the best way to express that is to stop buying their product, stop using their product, stop producing maps for their product. But please stop bitching about how bad they are because no one wants to constantly hear the rants of one bitter individual, least of all, Blizzard.
EDIT: Oh, and also, why make maps? There are massive communities outside of Battle.net (as some of the designers said) that will play, test or critique your map... you can circumvent the popularity system that way. Battle.net 2.0 is not really designed for massive RPG or storytelling maps... for the reasons listed above. So why make these kinds of maps? I dunno, cause the process is fun? Because if you were just doing it to get famous or whatever that is, you're ...psychologically damaged?
0
@Colt556: Go
I think you need to come down to reality. This is a video game.
"Big brother" Blizzard is oppressing its map-making community by not allowing them to post whatever content they want without consequences? If you don't want to play games with vulgar obscenities, don't join them? This is about "freedom"?
Quit bitching... honestly, I'm embarrassed for you. Dozens of people just died in Haiti due to diarrhea. If these are the things you complain about, I think you've got it pretty good.
0
@progammer: Go
Then let me know how/when I can help. :)
I also have a pretty ridonk gaming laptop (all settings on either High or Ultra) but no video editing software... however if you need screens done, give me a shout!