For better or worse, I've it seems anymore if you don't incorporate some visible amount of interlocking within your map, people just ignore it, or put it down. Don't get me wrong, Interlocking is one of the most valuable tools forgers have at their disposal and I do frequently use it to make maps cleaner, or to make different geometry. I've just noticed a trend where if there is any place something could have been interlocked, and it wasn't, everyone jumps on the author of the map. I personally like interlocking, but I don't start jumping on the creator because he didn't interlock a floor somewhere. All I'm saying is with the advent of this glitch, it seems if you DON'T use it everywhere possible, you get negative comments. Its usually obvious from basic images if a map had little effort put into it(lining up objects and what not), and I don't think some of the forgers deserve to have their creations be disregarded so easily. What are your thoughts on the matter?
idk people just get so used to seeing interlocked objects that when it isn't interlocked that say it sucks. most people don't judge maps on game play but rather on aesthetics
I personaly dont care if a person uses interlocking objects. im one of the types who luv the gameplay and dont really care if it looks like a P.O.S. well... i take that back. But dont let that criticism put u down man, theres always room where improvement
agreed. i had a map that did this recently. the topic got like 5 replies after pics were up about how there was no interlocking, looked poorly made, etc. the first one was something like this: "well then, it really does look poorly made. no interlocking whatsoever, and probably plays poorly too. i see no reason to download." i only use it where i need to.
I wouldn't say it's required, but if there is somewhere where it would look a lot better, or fix a bug, then do it, since takign your time is the most important factor in map-making. Look at any of the legendary maps around, all of them are near perfectly straight with little to no glitches. Just take the time to fix these problems and it will work out for you.
One could argue that interlocking shows that the person had the dedication to spend the extra time on his map and make it look much better, therefore his map is more worth your while. One could also argue that interlocking does change the gameplay significantly in some places. An interlocked floor reduced the slight bump, which I know has messed up grenade throws for me, but could then be exploited. Also, interlocking eliminates small gaps in walls which can be exploited and shot through. My biggest problem with interlocking is that it takes a very large amount of time, and if your map is incomplete, re-interlocking everything is a pain in the ass. On my more complex maps that I'm working on, I've built a "draft" map with no interlocking, which makes it easier to change things on the fly without completely remaking the map.
But the point is, maps don't get a second glance if the map isn't interlocked, whether it is necessary or not.
I don't think anybody believes maps need interlocking to be good. People are just eager to gain reputation and posts and things like having no interlocking or having lots of power weapons are easy to ways to give "criticism" so people jump on it. Its the same story with multiple people posting the "this topic does not comply with the stardards etc" thing. Personally, I interlock everything. I interlock and make everything float at the same time. If something isn't so hard to place it bursts my veins with frustration then its not worth doing in my book.
People interlock because it gives the illusion that it is one full piece, not a bunch of blocks put together to make a floor, one floor
I think that maps shouldn't be judged on looks alone. Sure, interlocking makes it look amazing. But if you can accomplish the same purpose without interlocking why not? Maybe it's better to interlock, but it shouldn't be the basis of judgement.
I actually came to post this after seeing people talking about Lintendo's newest map. I helped test it out, and during that time (well before he posted it here) he talked about how he purposely didn't interlock objects as to gain more surface area for the floor. Well, sure enough the first posts were criticism on his choice to not interlock. Now, I know not everyone has these design reasons, but the fact remains people seem all to eager to leap on map creators for not doing it. In my case a currently unreleased map has a small gap in one set of floors (the kind where two boxes butt up against each other, the non-fused way of doing it), and some of the boxes making up the top wall aren't interlocked. My map is completely out of boxes. I could make up more barrier space with, say, bridges, but then it would look like patchwork as opposed to a solid wall. Removing two entire boxes from the top wall isn't worth sealing a small crack between a floor, and if I condense them, the map won't line up properly anymore. This is one of the issues I've been trying to find some sort of fix to, because as long as it exists I don't feel my map will get a fair review. Which frankly sucks, because I've put a ton of time into play testing and balancing weapon placement, spawning, etc. The map is ready to play, and I do want to post it, but I also want people to use it, so it has to wait until I can come up with a clever way to seal that area off without making it look like a junk pile.
Sometimes people assume that if the objects are not interlocked, the author of the map doesn't know how to perform the technique and is a novice Forger. They assume that any map by a novice is not worth downloading. But most maps are better with interlocking. The aesthetics of the map help immerse the player into the map. And there are practical purposes too. If I throw a grenade at a wall so that it is supposed to bounce and land at my enemy's feet, I get angry when it goes through a gap.
I get so tired of the obligatory, "This map could use interlocking," reponses. I've even seen people critique maps because there wasn't enough interlocking. I also understand that gaps can swallow grenades, but I think that would be such a small percentage of throws that it wouldn't really matter. And, I've yet to walk across ANY boxes, interlocked or not, where there isn't some amount of 'hop'. Interlocking is the new Chewbacca Defense for a map being worthy of a DL.
"That does NOT MAKE SENSE!" Interlocking is necessary to make maps stand out in foundry. Not simply because they're interlocked, or even because of the grenade physics furious mentioned. Frankly, it's the only way to make something in foundry that's not boxy. It's just the nature of the game. That being said, there are maps where I could care less if interlocking is used. But, for general play, I'm not going to DL a bunch of 90° angles with grenade catchers.
"That does NOT MAKE SENSE!" [/quote] I was hoping someone would catch that... You make an interesting point about 90 degree angles. But, most maps are still laid out as if on graph paper. Most angles are 90, or 45...
Actually this is similar to one of the major problems I had on my last map I made, I ran out of items to stop people nade jumping out of the map, and thus had to resort to some very unorthodox methods, and the map looked very messy, although I had spent A LOT of time playtesting it. I purposely left gaps in some walls for the explicit purpose of throwing nades through, and yet people perceived this as accidental, and thus had a lower opinion of the map. Its is very difficult to make EVERYTHING line up perfectly, and I have always focused more on my maps gameplay than small problems like these.
If you make these facts clear in your map post and your reasons are sound, people who bother to read will not mind at all. People who don't read, well, you shouldn'e be too bothered with their flames...