Also, I have to say that I find it exceptionally funny that The Fated Fire got tons of crap from people here when talking about the Hero's Journey and how it was the foundation of his design philosophy. And now some of you guys that butchered him over it are recognizing that he wasn't just full of **** (well maybe a little bit, but not on that front). And I mean that not as a shot at anyone. It literally just makes me chuckle.
How does it feel knowing that you'll only be remembered for having a generic Two Base Two Tower that's been reused over and over
He was full of ****. Completely and totally. Not on board with this whole discussion of non discernable greats. If you don't care to compare yourself fine, but don't tell me there isn't a best (or better). That's a dangerous mindset and cop out for lesser people to feel better.
Here's an opinion I'll share after playing Community Slayer. Inb4 everything is replaced with sewers. Maps with 32 wide ramps and walkways all along the exterior are making a mistake. I did this on Spellbound because I wanted that map to feel like a large cave (and I didn't know how to scale terrain when I made that map; there's a smaller version I never released). But as I learned more about the way people play the game, I realized that this kind of pathing allows players to go anywhere from anywhere without any rhyme or reason to their decision making and it makes the game play too fast and chaotic. I personally don't find free flowing pathing "boring" or "intellectually dull"; when I set out to design a map, I'm not striving to make something that pushes my mechanical skill to the brink. I just want the pathing to direct player movement and create predictable gameplay because I think level design should have progression that I described earlier. When I play a free flowing map, it's like listening to a song chorus on loop or watching a slice of life anime. Everything is on the same level of importance and everything requires the same level of commitment, so players just do whatever they want. I think good level design has ebbs and flows, and the perfect map for me is a map that pushes that to its potential. The main thing to remember is to not do that at the expense of being intuitive to the player, because it's very easy to complicate the pathing to the point of being annoying to even use. There is a balance to be struck, and I personally would like to see more 4v4 maps that control their pathing.
Ewwwwww What is this an intervention? Can i make it any more obvious that i'm mostly shitposting. And if you can't find out where the truth starts and where the **** posting ends then oh well that's why it's fun
Well I think Fated was on the right track, but using the wrong train cars... because his idea of heroism was squarely in line with "cool moments" and the whole "go anywhere from anywhere" approach. I think what makes the player feel powerful like a hero is when the map rewards their decisions with geometric advantages. When you can do whatever you want, you're only being rewarded for being good at Spartan Abilities.
I have no concern about what anyone thinks about it. It's not important. He was selling his maps, and that's pretty much the extent of it. People were upset at him for that, and I don't really understand that, or agree that he did anything wrong on that front. Not saying he was innocent of doing other things wrong, since I never felt like I knew enough to speak on that. I'm only talking about the reaction to what he wrote about his maps. There was and is legitimacy to what he called the Hero's Journey within level/game design. I believe that he was attempting, as best he was able, to implement it into his maps. I don't really see that as being full of ****. I can understand why you or other people might see it that way. I just don't agree. Regarding your second statement, it presupposes that people can be 'lesser' or 'greater'. That can be a useful mindset when working towards developing a specific skill set, but when the perspective of 'lesser' or 'greater' within a specific skill set is equated with someone being a 'lesser' or 'greater' PERSON as a result of their talent within that skill set, there's the potential for THAT mindset to become dangerous also. Virtually any mindset can be considered dangerous depending upon the context.
I haven't seen anyone copping out. If anything, I'm the only person who has named names. I just don't think the best level designer exists yet, especially in Halo 5.
Also some of you guys are straight up bullies, it doesn't matter how much you disagree with someone you shouldn't treat them like ****. And it's not just multi and xandrith Purely fat called tom cinder cancer before for being a filthy casual. And i think given to fly and multi raided on of wyrvens threads and bullied her for some reason but i'm not sure about that one. Like seriously guys? Wipe the dorito dust off your chest and learn how to be the better person
Dude you didn't just claim you were good, you claimed you were THE BEST and "trolled" for weeks. Like, at least humor us with some discussion. I rather read nerdy novels than passive aggressive **** written in sarcasm voice.
wErE jUsT tRoLlInG But really, you can't be a troll AND have feelings about the things you were trolling about. The tale of "crying wolf" comes to mind.
Well by "person" you mean level designer, than yes some designers are better than others. If by lesser person you're talking about their value as a human being, obviously I don't think that lmao. That would be pretty inhumane. One of my biggest pet peeves is the moment someone tries to determine quality another body comes in and says "well no one is really BETTER just different". Like what do you want me to do with that ahah Classic red herring fallacy, attempting to change the point of contention by bringing up something irrelevant. Reason fails again on forgehub.
Well, I have a rant welling up inside me in response to this, but I need to sleep, lol. Honestly, I think all you need to do is acknowledge it. Most people are perfectly okay with having a discussion about relative value within a specific framework if they feel like their statements regarding that relative value won't be interpreted as a comment about a persons inherent or collective value as a human being. Sometimes those ground rules just need to be stated explicitly before a discussion can really take place. Whether or not that should be necessary is an entirely different discussion...