Snapmap, or Doom 1 and 2 editing?

[Aloxian]

After purchasing a copy of DOOM for my PS4, I started to experiment with its editor "Snapmap". Then I thought about old school doom editors like Slade and Doom Builder ect. The question I'm asking, is what do people prefer? Snapmap or old school editing?

Personally, I prefer old school editing, as I think the Doom engines limitations, provide a unique creative challenge, that has been overcome in many ways to create amazing WADS in the past. Also, there is a huge veteran community behind old school editing and there is just something about the feel of classic doom.

Leave your opinion bellow:

[MinerOfWorlds]

I like old school editing if it's in UMDF but if you mean vanilla doom format then i prefer snapmap.

[pavera]

Definitely prefer old school editing. The difference is that, while Snapmap seems to be a fun tool to poke around with placing pre-fabs and hooking up different gameplay scenerios in otherwise same-difference environments, the editing tools that we have for Doom 1/2 make it easy to create a set of levels that are on par with and even beyond the standards of the original game.

Doom Builder has been used to create countless levels that exceed the gameplay standards of the original Doom, and is still being used to forge new and interesting ideas. Snapmap is an interesting solution to creating an easy access level editor in a modern engine, but you'll never see anything in it that stands up to the campaign levels. Even the pre-fabs that they give you feel empty and boxy compared to the environments in the campaign levels.

Honestly I would say that you have LESS limitations when working with old school Doom, since the entire capability of the engine (and more, in advanced ports) is at your fingertips, and it is very easy to use and get the hang of. Become one of us, one of us!

[Deleted_Account]

DoomCad is where it's at!

[VeeTHis]

I HIGHLY pefer old-school editing by a long shot. I mean, you have a large set of DOOM Map-making tools, like Doom Builder, etc.

Also, you have more freedom of what you want your map to be. With some skill, you can make pretty good levels that are on the same level as the original game, or make even better ones! Trust me, I'm not a huge fan of Doom I's level design. I highly prefer Doom II, but Doom II does have it's questionable map design moments, too.

Also, with old-school editing, you have much more tools to work with, like a huge set of map making programs, SLADE, XWE, all that stuff, and all of that lets you create a map to your heart's content. You can put custom textures, monsters, music, etc. in with those tools.

With Snapmap, it's very limited. I mean, you can only place room that have already been designed. That's really the only point I have to make about Snapmap because I don't own the new Doom, sadly.
And I actually kind of prefer Bethesda making the new Doom because... I just feel like ID would've sticked with their classic Doom level designs, and just spice it up a little bit, put all new graphics in, make it even MORE violent, and that stuff.

Old-school map making is MUCH better in my opinion.

[Chezza]

If gzdoom and modern source port equivalents are also considered old school then classic Doom is the superior editor since it allows you to do so much more with a near unlimited amount of freedom. Creating wall by wall separately (although Snap map does have its own form) with the ability to add custom monsters, weapons, textures, sounds, scripts etc is something Snapmap can never achieve.

However having 100% freedom doesn't suit everyone. In fact it requires lots more work from its creator and still may produce garbage in both aesthetics and gameplay wise. Meanwhile Snapmap is the most efficient editor and allows very manageable scripting for plebs like myself. Currently I have more interest in Snapmap for these reasons. It still needs more work but resourceful and creative mappers can definitely make some great content with it.

I can't choose one, they both have notably stronger and weaker attributes than each other.

[snapshot]

SnapMap is too limited, most time i end up trying to create something not even possible within SnapMap's limits, I Prefer old school editing, gives much more freedoom.

[DoctorGenesis]

I prefer old school, it is better in every single way.

[Tracer]

I prefer old school mapping because it's actual crestivity...not just an over glorified virtual jigsaw puzzle.

[Doomkid]

Considering old-school Doom mapping gives a person a billion-fold more freedom, it's the obvious choice for me.

[jazzmaster9]

I would take UDMF mapping over SnapMap. I I can see myself enjoying Snapmap over Vanilla Mapping since I like a bit of scripting in maps.

[MFG38]

The thing with SnapMap versus old-school Doom editors is that they both have their strengths and weaknesses. With SnapMap, it's easy to do custom gameplay besides the usual "run around and shoot shit", which isn't possible in old-school Doom unless you use an advanced source port like ZDoom (RIP). On the other hand, old-school Doom is less restrictive when it comes to map design - while it is possible to do custom geometry in SnapMap, the possibilities are more limited due to the nature of SnapMap.

I do prefer old-school Doom editors over SnapMap just because it's way less limited, although SnapMap is admittedly fun to fuck around with. I just wish it wasn't as restrictive as it is.

[printz]

What? Snapmap also exists for Doom 1 and 2? If so, why discriminate against Doom 3? :(

[DooM_RO]

Snapmap is garbage.

[DMPhobos]

Is there really anyone who prefers snapmap over classic doom editing?

snapmap it's fine for a quick map in the new doom, but nothing bears classic doom editing IMO, especially since you can now pretty much create easily anything you think of

[CyberosLeopard]

From what I recall about Doom 4/2016's Snapmap, of which I had only played for around 30 minutes on my brother's XOne and said play was several months ago, I despise it. Snapmap is pretty much a glorified Lego set, and like the for-mentioned toy, there's never enough blasted pieces to make anything worthwhile. One stitches pre-made room to pre-made room from a bird's-eye prospective, which is infuriating when two seemingly compatible rooms cannot connect to later find that they are on differing height levels, which also makes creating more labyrinthine levels nigh-impossible. This coupled with the irritation of aligning various objects and items without the ability to individually change their X,Y and Z axes resulted with me simply giving up and returning to Doom Builder.

There may well be some good aspects of Snapmap, but I simply don't remember them.

[LordShadowZ]

SnapMap is cool in concept but far too limited in what you can accomplish with it. Doom Builder let's you do whatever you want within the old school engine, allowing for a hell of a lot more creativity.

[DooM_RO]

The core principles of Snapmap seem to emulate the type of modding we do on Doomworld such as accessibility and power but in a severely limited way. Id did try to make it better by adding more props and textures for PBMs but it's not enough, not by a long shot. Here's what I want from future modding:

- Make it as simple as possible without sacrificing features

- In-built 3D modelling. In a very limited and crude way, modifying a player blocking module and applying a texture is 3D modeling. I know a lot of people are intimidated by 3D modelling but if you've ever made a Doom map you've already made a 3D model of sorts, it's just that what you do on the Z axis is more limited. I imagine a simple to use but powerful in-built program for designing architecture and a selection of 500 textures to choose from.

- All props and textures from the campaign should be available. Don't understand why this wasn't already the case.

- Well-made player-made props should have their own category. There was this really cool gore tree made by a player that looked very convincing and spawned enemies using all sorts of cool tricks. Stuff like this should be vote-based.

- A custom scripting language.

- A texture editor.

That would be a good start. As it stands, I see no reason to waste my time with it when I can make so much cool stuff in GZDoomBuilder.

[Phml]

I've loved "mapping for dummies" since TimeSplitters 2 and my only beef with it is the severe limitations of the tools. I could be talking out of my ass because what do I know about programming, but it seems like this is a human problem more than a programming one; the people conceiving these tools having such proficiency they can't put themselves in the shoes of the average user, and on top of that a lack of financial incentive to make these tools as good as they could be.

[Agentbromsnor]

SnapMap feels to me as if the designers figured they would throw in a really basic "editor", just so they can say the game has one and lock the rest of the game's modding potential behind a big metal door.

I think id Software (or Activision's table-scraps, as I like to call them these days) should have never joined Zenimax. While having a level-editor and access to source-code might not sound all that important to games today, I think that not having them is trampling on the rich history that id used to have with the modding community.

[jazzmaster9]

Agentbromsnor said:

SnapMap feels to me as if the designers figured they would throw in a really basic "editor", just so they can say the game has one and lock the rest of the game's modding potential behind a big metal door.

I think id Software (or Activision's table-scraps, as I like to call them these days) should have never joined Zenimax. While having a level-editor and access to source-code might not sound all that important to games today, I think that not having them is trampling on the rich history that id used to have with the modding community.

We gotta keep in mind how complex the Id tech 6 is, its not something that the regular Joe can just open in an editor and make maps in casually.

They are not locking anything, they understand the complexity of the engine feel it is not something that can be easily messed with.

Remember how long most Doom 3 mods took? yeah if id had the an editor out, the next Doom 2016 mapset would come out in... 2040

*voice in the distance: but what about skyrim? it has mods.
what about it? it uses a different engine than id tech 6 which is more robust.

[Chezza]

Yup Snap map is worth praise when it comes to engineering. Next to no download times, easily managed logic in both console and PCs and gradual increase in freedom by adding tools to create custom walls etc. There is a lot to appreciate in snap map except for the load time, memory limits, 12 monster on screen limit and inability to import external content.

For those who are still unaware, go to snapmap and place a player blocking volume and look through the custom textures you now can add. It has a range of modern and classic textures that can be manipulated to any angle and size. Creative people can definitely produce good maps with this.

[Sick Bow]

Doomkid said:

Considering old-school Doom mapping gives a person a billion-fold more freedom, it's the obvious choice for me.

Ding ding ding. Also, that's not to say that SnapMap isn't a lot of fun, or isn't more accesible.