Spring RTS Engine

As some of you know, I feel that with the advent of the new map format, we should phase out all of our old maps and their format.

I do realize that many of you spent a long time making such maps, even I did at some point. However, due to the fact that I haven't created a map in some time, I might be a little biased to the suggestion I present.

I feel like we could really cut down on file sizes and bandwidth usage as well as bring about a creative rebirth in our maps, starting somewhat from scratch, and maybe getting back on FU..

I do realize that this will probably not come to pass, and that many will be opposed, however, I just want to observe some actual poll numbers and hear opinions..

For those lacking a little information and wish to observe the new map format in action..
http://taspring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewt ... sc&start=0

I'm opposed to it, but then again, I've always been quite mindful towards the size of my several maps.

Sod off, too much work has gone into making those maps by incredibly dedicated map makers to just 'phase them out', and we are no long pressed for bandwidth as far as I've been led to beleive.

Nah, while some are pure crap, others are really good and deserve to be carried on.

besides that, their damage has already been done right? They have been dowloaded by most people who will play them and as long as people only release the maps in the new versions, it won't really matter if one or two really good one preserve. I woulnd't mind though if we'd kick some really bad to mediocore maps out of the FU map list. (And i'm not talking about speedmetal here, more maps that just aren't played and been done without putting any effort into it)

IMO classics like Comet Catcher, Altored Divide or Delta Siege do not deserve to phase out... Just make sure that all new maps are made in a new format and yes - delete obsolete maps from the list.

If you know anything about the new map format, to remake those maps would be extremely easy, and in most instances would cut their file sizes by huge amounts..

Well, if map makers have nothing against redoing them...

Certain maps don't fit the new format very well though, they would require tons of layers to look the same (like picasso's), but I guess 90 % of the maps can be done in the new system with 10% of the filesize.
But as said before, filesize isn't really the issue anymore.

Johns_Volition wrote:besides that, their damage has already been done right? They have been dowloaded by most people who will play them and as long as people only release the maps in the new versions, it won't really matter if one or two really good one preserve.

For all those people who play just aa on the same map.

Johns_Volition wrote:I woulnd't mind though if we'd kick some really bad to mediocore maps out of the FU map list. (And i'm not talking about speedmetal here, more maps that just aren't played and been done without putting any effort into it)

with you on this.. flatty patty, many of the experimental maps, genbloods earlier work etc..

Neuralize wrote:If you know anything about the new map format, to remake those maps would be extremely easy, and in most instances would cut their file sizes by huge amounts..

there are some things that require a finer touches to accomplish, Whakamutunga Riri is one of them. Many maps yes but we still have to hand draw a lot of details for finer points on maps.

smoth wrote:there are some things that require a finer touches to accomplish, Whakamutunga Riri is one of them. Many maps yes but we still have to hand draw a lot of details for finer points on maps.

+1 to that whole post, but especially this bit. Texture splatting does poorly on non-nature maps, with things like cities, ruins, or facilities.

Erom wrote: +1 to that whole post, but especially this bit. Texture splatting does poorly on non-nature maps, with things like cities, ruins, or facilities.

We'll see about this, I'm going to do some tests and see just how bad it might be, although, I actually can visualize a method where it would look appealing.

yeah, a city grid would be a pain, have fun fighting the tiling system to get your roads in the right place.

Well... until the new map format is fully functional I'm not going to even bother trying it (I like custom features too much)

jcnossen wrote:Certain maps don't fit the new format very well though, they would require tons of layers to look the same (like picasso's), but I guess 90 % of the maps can be done in the new system with 10% of the filesize.
But as said before, filesize isn't really the issue anymore.

Does the new system support decals? All that would really be needed is the ability to overlay an image with a transparency mask over the map in a mapper defined location and many of the more incompatible maps become workable again.

I think phasing out maps from the old format is a terrible idea. I'm sure there are some other mappers around here that agree with me... Maybe I would be more persuaded if I saw some examples of complex multi-layered maps in the new format.

To be honest, I think this would be a great way to filter out the crap maps, of which there are several (though I wont name any).

That way, the good maps will be transferred over into the new map format, while the older, shitty ones that noone really plays, but most have on their harddrives for some reason or other, are left behind...

and then we get a plethora of bad maps... again.

We purged them once and then several of them were quickly remade, while many good maps died off becuase they took too much work.

I can't say I'd be particualy happy if we ditched the old format... but I doubt thats goona stop it being ditched. I guess someone will just have to explane this new map format to me, because I just can't see how I'm goona be able to make anything that looks even half as good with it.

aGorm

The old format is still around.