cool. I guess that would be feasible because people would have an idea of its layout already. It wouldn't then be totally blind. I just got an idea, of visible, invisible blockers, using visible boundaries set to different colors (dynamic, mind you) indicating whether they can be walked through, shot, through etc.
INVISILOCK IS MULTILOCKONS GREATEST CREATION Seriously, though. He made this in like 10 minutes and it's almost perfect ahahahaha he's such a Halo 2 fuccboi
Damn. I guess the big argument is over, huh? What I got out of it is this: chunk agrees with me but I need to sharpen my temper into a fine, delicious wine to score his likes.
That map looks boring as **** Also 45 degree ramps everywhere, no one will ***** though because it's not forgers
Does anyone have the Jiggly Bomb Emoji in a full sized picture? I need it and thnx in advance daddy OwO
The Destiny community has a very shallow understanding of level design. I remember getting in an argument with someone who thought one of the maps was balanced and a good map because it was symmetric, when I tried to explain to him that there was only one strategy and that it would play asymmetrically in favor of that, and therefore wasn't going to play well for the game mode. I was vindicated obviously. The map was awful in Trials of Osiris.
Actually looking back at the wiki because I forgot Summit's name, a lot of BO1 maps had character. Hanger 18 = Area 51 Kowloon = Slum-like Chinese rooftops Hazard = Cuban golf course Drive-In = American movie lot The list goes on...
Those were all made by Phil Tasker the god. He quit after BO3 pretty recently, had some drinks with him yesterday --- Double Post Merged, Jul 14, 2017 --- Those were all made by Phil Tasker the god. He quit after BO3 pretty recently, had some drinks with him yesterday
It's not even that I only agree with one side. I tend to always see both sides of an argument/debate. That combined with my tendency to root for the underdog usually results in me arguing in favor of the minority side. I agree that there are similarities in the designs that have been discussed. There are obviously similarities in how certain styled maps are going to play. I don't have any argument with that. What I will take issue with is overlooking the differences in how similarly styled maps can play. If someone were to say that a rural street is the same as a freeway, or that a stoplight is the same thing as a stop sign, I would say that's true on one level. To someone who's lived their whole life in a rain-forest this would probably appear to be completely accurate. Anyone with any experience with roads knows that they're different though. Disregarding the differences doesn't make sense. Translating that back into the Halo world, I can't really take anyone seriously who says that Regret plays the same as Midship. On one level it does, but that's looking at things ONLY from a really broad view, while discounting the differences. Both perspectives are vitally important. One impacts the overall flow of game. The other impacts the moment to moment engagements and interactions of the player. It's possible to have to similarly designed and playing maps, yet have differences that result in unique battles. Again, it's the macro view vs the micro view. Both sides are prioritizing one view, and I don't have any problem with that, so long as it doesn't ignore the other view. The best approach is one that takes BOTH into account. I think everyone here understands that, and agrees. I'm mostly just trying to make sure that this holistic view gets communicated clearly, because the tendency anytime there's a debate is to discount the alternate perspective as a way of strengthening your side of the story. There's almost always truth to both sides of a debate. Y'all can argue about which side is right, and I'll just go on saying both sides are right, and both sides are ignoring the validity in the opposing perspective.