1 SECTOR - Community Project idea

[MFG38]

@bobstremglav You're probably not gonna like what I have to say here, but as a fairly experienced community project leader who wrote an entire post about how and when to host one, I feel the need to share some of my own thoughts on what I'm seeing in this thread. 

 

First off, there's no need to be so hostile towards Xaser just because he's advertising new standards that this project would benefit from using. It doesn't paint a very good picture of you as a project lead to do so. While I understand your desire of sticking to a cl9 compatibility target, you can express it in a more respectful manner than what you displayed above. Moreover, I think you're hurting the project and people's chances of contributing by limiting map slots to the standard 32. At least consider dropping the map slot restriction and employing UMAPINFO.

 

Second, your entire tangent about MBF21 and its very existence somehow translating to a lack of creativity is baffling. If anything, the way I see it, the extra features provided by MBF21 allow mappers to express their creativity in a less restrictive manner than Boom. Think about this: MBF21 gave us parameterized codepointers that let modders extend the functionality of their custom monters/weapons/whatever-else beyond the hardcoded functions. Before MBF21, the ability to do that was limited to ZDoom and Eternity and their derivatives. Surely it's a good thing that modders can do more in a wider range of source ports than before, wouldn't you agree?

 

Third, sky transfers work in cl9 and I don't see a reason why people shouldn't be allowed to use them.

 

I can only hope that you'll see the error of your ways and be willing to do some course correction after reading this.

[bobstremglav]

51 minutes ago, MFG38 said:

Third, sky transfers work in cl9 and I don't see a reason why people shouldn't be allowed to use them.

My mapping experience is very limited, so I thought that Boom and cl9 are the same. Other guy said that sky transfers are from MBF, and I thought that this was violation of restrictions. I realise that my writing is bad, so thought that maybe rules were ignored or poorly understood. I didn't wanted to just say that target source port is Boom, because I thought that, againt, cl9 is the same thing, and that would be understood better for others, and didn't meant to download outdated source port. That's only complaint I can agree with.

 

I wouldn't be so hostile if Xaser understood my wish against using MBF21. I already said reasons why I don't want to use it. I suggested this project for those who want to make 1 sector maps with cl9 format. Do I force you? No, you can make 1 sector map with mbf21 by yourself, outside of project. I don't even force you to participate in project at all, so I don't see reasons to complain about restrictions. I warned about restrictions since beginning.

Again, many other projects were made good with many restrictions, so I can't see why this can't be done here.

 

I clarified my target preference for map format since start. Would you like if you published your map (for example, vanilla) then person comes it and insist that you should drop it in favor of better map format? Many people already joined neverminding about restriction, and few maps were produced already, so that's probably shows that people interested in project and its restriction, and MBF21 is not needed.

 

After all, my personal preferences are vanilla and limit removing. Why I should choose MBF21 if I can't use its benefits? I can make it MBF21 targeted, but then

- Everybody will be forced to basically use its abilities, which most of times will be unnecessary or forced. It's easier to center map around theme or gameplay, not map format abilities. This is will be the case for me.

- It will restrict source ports of choice more, than using older map formats. Older map formats supported by much bigger variety of sourse ports, giving you ability to use old known and loved techs.

- It will restrict participants, because it's still easier to learn older formats and make maps with them. Also, just using limit removing already can give a chance for newcomers to try out, while in case of MBF21 you need to learn it, practise. Also use a Ultimate Doom Builder, which, again, would lag on lower end machine probably and limit participants even more. Personally, I prefer Doom Builder 1 and 2.

- My personal mapping limit is limit removing. I thought that one of advantages of community project is when idea summoner himself can make maps to present an idea better.

- You're talking only from perspective of those who want to use MBF21, forgetting that there enough of people who want to just map on vanilla, limit removing, boom, zdoom, etc. Do I come into projects threads and force mappers to use vanilla because I like it?

 

In summary: MBF21 is just not my personal sweet, and I think there still people like me. If you want to use MBF21 then just use it and make projects based on it, without coming into projects of other people and insisting them to use it too.

Edited May 15 by bobstremglav

[NinthBurn]

Do joined sectors count as 1 for this project?

[Astar]

1 hour ago, MFG38 said:

bobstremglav You're probably not gonna like what I have to say here, but as a fairly experienced community project leader who wrote an entire post about how and when to host one, I feel the need to share some of my own thoughts on what I'm seeing in this thread. 

I think the whole point of the project is that the author himself wants to deliberately work within certain limitations.

 

And please don't put pressure on the person.

It's not an easy task... 

[Walter confetti]

Yeah, about map slot everything goes good... Overall, i didn't even started to map for this yet!

[bobstremglav]

17 minutes ago, NinthBurn said:

Do joined sectors count as 1 for this project?

Anything is allowed while final map is fitting main restrictions, especially: just 2 sectors, but one of them is not used in any way, exactly the same as main sector and is here only for proper monster working

[bobstremglav]

https://doomwiki.org/wiki/PrBoom

 

This was the source of my confusion with sky transfer. As somebody said, sky transfers are mbf feature, while mbf here is totally not listed here as complevel 9

[Shepardus]

33 minutes ago, bobstremglav said:

Anything is allowed while final map is fitting main restrictions, especially: just 2 sectors, but one of them is not used in any way, exactly the same as main sector and is here only for proper monster working

I'm not sure if you missed my previous post in this thread, but you don't need a second sector to avoid the line of sight bug, you just need to use a node builder that's not buggy. I'm not sure what node builders have the bug (I've heard ZenNode but haven't tried), but I made a one-sector map with ZDBSP and it ran fine in all source ports I tried, including Chocolate Doom.

[iddq_tea]

@Shepardus It happens with ZenNode too, but I found a workaround for it. The rules on that will be updated.

 

Sorry about the mess, everyone, I talked to Bobby and he agreed to let me take control of this project. There will be a new thread with clearer rules, and every map and claimed slot will be brought over.

[AnArchaicApparatus]

Also, just as a note w' the UMAPINFO map-count thing, having only one sector is likely to spawn a lot of (at least relatively) short maps.

 

It can be easy for even normal MegaWads to get tiring imho, but this would be a perfect candidate if there ever was one to take advantage of that, leaving aside any  strict-compatability-by-principle kinda thing.

[DynamiteKaitorn]

Guessing there is only going to be 32 slots maximum so I'll see what I can do. Can I has Map 6? uwu

[Doomy__Doom]

I'll throw my hat in for any late slot (20+). Assuming eventual new rules/thread will have slots in the first place, that is.

[iddq_tea]

 

New thread has been made, this one will no longer be maintained as the original creator abandoned it.