.::LvL
Q3A Database
Simplicity (2)
by A10k
Simplicity (2) by A10k
Comments
Add a comment
avatar
**Preview only**
Be sure to submit your comment
Submit
Preview
Cancel
Submitting comment...
Sometimes I think these guys are trolls, probably right.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Lavaman unregistered
#22   01 May 2002
Still sounds a little like sour grapes to me :P.All i was saying was theres no detail in the lvl to begin with.It doesnt make a differance if you set details higher or lower, so i suppose from that point of view its great.Gameplay is king and i cant argue that point.The last line of PI's review sums it up for me "It is a fairly basic map with bearable game play. The novelty can last for a game or two. "
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
<SuX0r> unregistered
#21   01 May 2002
Heh! I guess there is more to talk about with maps that could have used a bit more work. Either that or I keep getting bogged down in pointless arguments :p. Lavaman- As for misuse of English I was just being petty as I do find it irritating when ppl talk about how great their cpu is for no real reason other than to tell eveyone that they have a good cpu. Your English is very good considering you are not a native speaker (I am probably doing similar things in French atm :D). No offence intended but I would still have to disagree about the importance of detail as I have played q3 on higher detail and tbh it doesn't make a lot of difference to me beyond putting it in high res, anything else has no real effect on the gameplay.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Pure Imaginary unregistered
#20   30 Apr 2002
I guess it takes a very simple to cause people to talk about the complexity of the Quake 3 engine.

I also noticed that the maps on the bottom of each update seem to be getting a rather large number of comments. =P

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Pure Imaginary unregistered
#19   30 Apr 2002
"Kinda stating the obvious there Lavaman, apart from the hoards of cpma players who turn down detail etc to get the game running faster but that's just splitting hairs."

The vast majority of serious players actually don't play CPMA, and yes, most OSP players use ugly settings as well.

A10k set out to give you a simple novelty map, and that is what you get. In my opinion, the map is not as bad as it looks, and I can tell you there is actually purpose to the gameplay beyond simple weapon rushing, but there is no hiding the fact that you would not play it very long.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Lavaman unregistered
#18   30 Apr 2002
Sorry for the misuse of english its not my native language.

I dont want to discourage you A10k its great your mapping.If your dont have the time to sit down in front of radiant for long periods then practice speed building small symetrical maps, it really will help your brush work and generate new ideas.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
A10K unregistered
#17   30 Apr 2002
Well, I'm beta testing another map now, and this one, though still not too detailed, looks nicer. And I make undetailed maps not from lack of system ability but from lack of determination. (PS the map that's on beta has just under 400 brushes.)
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
<SuX0r> unregistered
#16   30 Apr 2002
Ermmmmmmm, I am quite happy playing q3 as I am atm. I can afford to upgrade and will be doing so in the near future, my point was that you seem to think q3 can only be run properly on high settings (and you have the cpu to prove it). I disagree and mentioned detail not being important as that was your only criticism of the map in the original post which I think is the least important of any suggestions for future maps. As regards sarcasm, do really have no perception of irony (my capital letters in the previous post were to highlight your missuse of "your" which has now occured in more than one post). One all I think :p. I'm currently in beta with his next map so we'll see what comes out :).
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Lavaman unregistered
#15   30 Apr 2002
pps

???Funny how software houses keep using an old engine.

do you really have no perception of sarcasim ?

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Lavaman unregistered
#14   30 Apr 2002
Look , dont take your frustrations out on me cause your cant afford to upgarde, its your problem. I have a wife and two kids so DONT talk to me about better things to spend MY money on, i already get enough of that from them :).As was already said quake3 is old and YOUR STILL running it with detail turned down.Anyways back to the orginal subject A10k's map or lack of it as the case may be.Make a small detailed level without using csg subtract

and make it under 500 brushes, now theres a challenge, but 50 brushes 2 or 3 textures no gameflow to speak of its neither a map or a level.

maybe if he had beta tested this he would have figured that out.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
<SuX0r> unregistered
#13   30 Apr 2002
Some of us have things we need to spend money on which aren't a top line cpu so we can rant on about how cool it is and how cool we are for having it. The detail argument is getting old and I believe that most ppl came down on the side of gameplay in previous arguments. Also the software houses are "still using an old engine" because "The quake 3 engine still is cutting edge" as you yourself said (quake 4 isn't actually out yet neither is UT 2003 or the new doom). YOU'RE entitled to YOUR opinion but don't expect the whole gaming community to agree with you especially when YOUR view is among a minority.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Lavaman unregistered
#12   30 Apr 2002
So the quake 3 engine isnt detailed???Funny how software houses keep using an old engine.

The quake3 engine still is cutting edge, nothing has really surpassed it in flexability and style.Anyways this detail argument is getting old, quake4 and the new doom will soon be here, not to mention unreal tourny 2003 .And your still talking about turning Quake 3 down???

Lavaman

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Octovus unregistered
#11   30 Apr 2002
Haven't posted here in a while, but I have to do it to disagree. Detail isn't important. What, has everyone become eye-candy whores while I was gone? (Most of the people commenting here know better than that, if not the community as a whole.) If you want detail, what are you doing playing such an old game anyways?

-Octovus

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
<SuX0r> unregistered
#10   30 Apr 2002
Only someone with a low end machine would say something like "I don't feel detail is all that important". Kinda stating the obvious there Lavaman, apart from the hoards of cpma players who turn down detail etc to get the game running faster but that's just splitting hairs. As regards running q3 properly I don't see why running it in low graphics settings would not be considered "running it properly", surely optimising rate speeds is more sensible as not many pc's can handle top settings for everything (that being the epitome of proper quake playing I would gather from your comment). That's just assuming you play the game rather than look at I suppose, each to their own.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
A10K unregistered
#9   30 Apr 2002
I'm giving up regular mapping for the most part for a while so I can do some terrain maps, so you won't be seeing too maps like this for some time.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Lavaman unregistered
#8   30 Apr 2002
Well i do feel having a lot of detail is important as well as layout.Only someone with a low end machine would say something like "I don't feel detail is all that important" seeing as your never have had the chance to run quake3 properly.As for PJ splitting hairs over the words level and map , well thats up to him :)

Quake3 @ 1280/1024 32bit everything up and on 142fps

spec

p4 2ghz geforce3 256mb rambus

:)

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
<SuX0r> unregistered
#7   29 Apr 2002
Well said PI, was still wondering what you were on when you said the map had okay gameplay (even in the context you put it in). A more complicated layout would make a much more playable next release, stating the obvious here but.. never mind. I don't feel detail is all that important as I play in low res and low texture detail due to having a shite cpu but more than 2 rooms (and some vertical play) is always a plus point :p. Look forward to future releases as always. Later! :D
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Pure Imaginary unregistered
#6   29 Apr 2002
A few brushes and textures makes a map, but they do not make a level.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
A10K unregistered
#5   29 Apr 2002
I made this map for the novelty of having a map with 50 brushes, though to Lavaman's disappointment most of my maps aren't that detailed. Don't worry, most of my others will start to look nicer soon.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Lavaman unregistered
#4   29 Apr 2002
A few brushes and a few textures does not make a map.

If split and textured properly this could have at least been nice looking.I think Pure Imaginary was having a good day when he reviewed this one. :)

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
<SuX0r> unregistered
#3   29 Apr 2002
Commenting and voting on your own map by any chance A10K?
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
TheGrandTurtle unregistered
#2   29 Apr 2002
This map is the best ever built for Quake III Arena. Such fine detail, smoothness and great fps. Item placement is perfect.

This map will keep you playing for days on end.

This level needs to be submitted to the game development officials for immediate distributing to every major store chain in the world!

Don't delay...download this astounding map now!!!! Whilst its still free :-)

No... realy, this is GREAT for small quick and fun games...best suited for two or three players. I realy like it.

Breaks the bordom from those big gothic maps.

Nice work.... please keep cranking these little maps out... the quake community needs more like this.

Thank You!

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
johnboy unregistered
#1   29 Apr 2002
why don't you just say this map sux!
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Context menu

For options and more

OK, Got it