The Colosseum (2)
The Colosseum (2) by {DEMO}LITION
Add a comment
**Preview only**
Be sure to submit your comment
Submitting comment...
$$ unregistered
#22   20 Dec 2010
What is Cranky Steve when people refer to it in reviews and whats its purpose?
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
SW12 unregistered
#21   19 Apr 2010
{DEMO}lition, WHY DIDN'T YOU POST A HARRY POTTER MAP LIKE YOU said you would?! Please post one, oh please, oh PLEASE!!!!
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Tig Rep. 1234
#20   18 Jun 2008
The link is correct, the problem is with Something Awful, the host for Cranky Steves. Lets hope they fix the problem :]
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Anonymous Cowherd unregistered
#19   15 Jun 2008
Link noworky. Where'd Cranky move to?
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Madan unregistered
#18   28 Feb 2004
The map is poor. Don't make a reviewer recant over political correctness. The kid'll do better next time...or he won't.


Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Richard Pygott unregistered
#17   02 Dec 2003
Quake 3 Level Review by Richard Pygott <a href=""></a>

Level Reviewed: The Coliseum by {DEMO}LITION

Coliseum seems to be a copy of a Tomb Raider 1 level that has been shrunk down to size for Quake 3, this is where the problems begin. The level worked in Tomb Raider and I think with a bit more planning and thought this level might have worked in Quake 3, but it fails miserably in all areas. The poor repetitive texturing could be forgiven if the level had more of an arcade feel to it, ie fast, fun and exciting, but this is everything but exciting or fast.

The main problem that I came across first was the traps in this level. I haven’t seen traps in a FPS since I played Blood and Doom a few years back, this slows the action down dramatically especially when the trap buttons don’t even work properly, and when you do get them to work you’ve already got a 12 gauge up your backside. The buttons that are used for jump-pads would have a lot better if proper jump-pads had been used, instead of small square buttons.

Some areas of the level don’t appear to be very well lit either, in fact some areas don’t look like any dynamic lighting has been used at all. Also, a lot of the time it feels like you are playing in a small box, as no attention has been given into making the level feel believable, atmosphere seems to be totally absent. The textures in this level seem to be completely absent also, as I think about only 5 have been used!!

Playing this level in single player mode with bot’s seems totally pointless, the bots stand around and just don’t really try and kill you, making for no challenge at all. They seem to act as clueless as you feel. I wouldn’t recommend playing this level with more than 3 players, not the 5 that the author states in the readme file, because the level is just not big enough.

On the other hand the author isn’t very old and experience comes with time. I would like to see further works by this author because some of the ideas implemented in this level are good, but just aren’t very well executed.


I can see why the author thought this conversion could have worked, as the Tomb Raider level that this is supposed to represent would have made quite a good large Quake 3 multi-player level, which could have supported quite a large amount of players. But this level is boring, slow and feels like your playing in a margarine tub with a few brown textures pasted here and there. If the author goes back to the drawing board and actually attempts to make this level like the Tomb Raider counterpart, then he may be on the road to success. But as it stands, this level is just not up to scratch at all, as there are far better offerings out there.

Richard Pygott Rating 3/10

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
{DEMO}LITION unregistered
#16   15 Nov 2003
I've already looked at most of those sites before (75% of them after making The Colosseum, though).
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
{DEMO}LITION unregistered
#15   15 Nov 2003
I've already looke at most of those sites before (75% of them after making The Colosseum, though).
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
GuitarMan unregistered
#14   15 Nov 2003
WTF? Looks like the links are not being read well by this site. (dear webmaster, what's going on here?).

Just put your mouse over the links and you'll read them, or better click the links and you'll be taken to the sites.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
GuitarMan unregistered
#13   15 Nov 2003
{DEMO}LITION, don't worry about the bad reviews, just take all the suggestions and advice (good or bad) and work on them.

I've released my first Q3A map long ago, and got a crappy review; since then I've been mapping a lot, but never released anything else (yet). I've spent a lot of time (before and after my first map) learning how to do it well. There's a lot of resources out there to learn, like:

- the Radiant website. They've got tutorials.

- <a href="" Target="_BLANK"></a> - check out the level design section.

- <a href="" Target="_BLANK"></a> - very good tutorials there.

- <a href="" Target="_BLANK"></a>/

- <a href="" Target="_BLANK"></a> - lots of good stuff there

- <a href="" Target="_BLANK"></a>/ - you REALLY should check this one out.

I'm sure there are more out there, but this ones were, and still are, the places I look.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
{DEMO}LITION unregistered
#12   11 Nov 2003
Well I got rid of those other 2 because they had some big problems. But as I said, I wanted to release something, and The Colosseum was the best out those. I am still stuck with ideas on my next map though :(
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Foebane unregistered
#11   11 Nov 2003
{DEMO}LITION, or should I say Paul (I saw your website), Seremtan has given you lots of great tips there, which is basically what every good Q3A map really needs, and which is what I've tried to include in my own three Q3A maps.

I was considering reviewing the maps you submitted, but one or two of the ones you sent in caused problems and graphical glitches with Q3A I'd never seen before, and adding bots actually crashed my computer more than once, but I'm sure that was down to compile errors with the AAS compiler. Also, in the map with the tall buildings, the bots DO appear, but they usually stand still, for some reason.

Generally though, I like your sense of design, and you do have some interesting ideas in your maps (the one with the security camera and the rocket launcher is particularly fun and inventive), but you do need to brush up (pun intended) on things like lighting - and if you have to include traps, make them so that players can see them in time if they're not otherwise distracted, like those fat spikes on Colosseum.

I hope you continue making maps for Q3A, and I look forward to seeing what you put in your next one! :)

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
{DEMO}LITION unregistered
#10   10 Nov 2003
That is fine review now.

And the problem was that I wanted water that looked like it was trickling out of the pipe. I think I will have to use a shader for that.

And the lighting is slightly better in my current version (I think you got the older one), which should be the one downloadable here on planetquake or get it from my site (<a href="demolition.250free...s/" Target="_BLANK"></a>). And I don't think the old one had the storch models in it. But they create a cool effect when you add the light over them. And the water looks nice in the newer one; it makes the water look like a gold evening type shine.

Bot support is include in the new one (though it wasn't as good as I wanted it (probably because of the size and the shape of the map).

I have some custom sounds that indicate the secret areas in the new one).

I agree the connectivity and shape wasn't what I wanted but I wanted to release something in the time I've had GTKRadiant (since late July), and The Colosseum was the only 'gone wrong' idea that was a completed map (or not so as the case may be).

yes I could have added my own textures but I wasn't very good with shaders then.

Do you think the item placement was crowded (it seemed like it to me, and most of the best weapons were in the secrets, which maybe wasn't such a good idea).

Think I should go into more depth like v1|3 suggested?

Finally, check out <a href="" Target="_BLANK"></a> for q3 maps and tutorials (though I have only one map).

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Seremtan unregistered
#9   10 Nov 2003
OK, you want more positive suggestions (other than: reading the manual about how to use water, how to clip etc., texture variety and also minimising tricks 'n traps - all things I mentioned in the review!)?

1. Adapting single-player levels from other games seldom works, for the simple reason that they tend to be linear while Q3A levels need to be interconnected. This applies regardless of how good the original was.

2. Give your player plenty of room to move in doors/passages/tunnels etc. Yours were a bit on the narrow side in places.

3. How about some botplay? I can see why you didn't include a n .aas with this as I can guess the bots would have played terribly. This may shock you but not every Quaker has DSL and not every released map makes it on to server rotation, so for a helluva lot of people, bots are their only opponents.

3. In an ideal FFA/Tourney level, pretty much every area is connected to as many other areas as possible.

4. Good gameplay is helped by the level being 'smooth', i.e. simply laid out with ease of movement and no bottlenecks. Water or narrow doors or buttons or secret areas don't really help in this department. Gamers don't really have time to jump up crates to get weapons when someone's trying to frag their ass.

5. Lighting is important. It's even more important when you're using the same texture all over everything. See Threewave's 'Courtyard Conundrum' - walls covered in boring brown gothic block yet the variations in the lighting improve the appearance immmensely (or you could even see my own remake, which is in LVL somewhere). And it can add extra depth to the gameplay (but only against human opponents).

6. Aesthetic gorgeousness is nice but gameplay is priority #1. If you look at my review of the Cinnamon Toast CTF just above the review of yr level I said it was pretty horrible to look at but played quite well, so don't take the comment about yr map's ugliness too hard. Gameplay is what matters, but if you can make some eye candy, even better.

7. Re. the water. When placing two water brushes side by side use common/nodraw on the sides that touch. Ideally, it would have been better to have used just ONE large brush for the water, even if parts of it extend beyond the hull. Using nodraw is the 'official' way, but I've found it doesn't always work the way it's supposed to.

8. "A 15 year old could make a map for Q3 as good as a 30 year old." Quite right - and they probably have. It's about good ideas and Radiant skillz, not how many mortgages you've had!

Will this do?

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
{DEMO}LITION unregistered
#8   09 Nov 2003
And maybe remove some of its block expansion (sorry about that, we've been doing block expansion in Geography. I think I mean remove its blockieness).
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
{DEMO}LITION unregistered
#7   09 Nov 2003
Well I can do a new version, if enough people would like that. Make its size more like the tombraider level. And maybe take away some of those dead ends. And I think the bouncer tunnle is a bit dodgy, I die in it about once every 20 times I go in it. Maybe a couple more secret areas as well. By the way, the one with the pillars that leads to the bouncer tunnle were meant to be the secret on the Tomb Raider level, where you have to jump up them so quik it is almost impossible (I used a walk through!). And maybe a trigger multiple would be a better option instead of the noisy button. Ok I'll stop now, I am blurting out too many ideas.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
v1l3 unregistered
#6   09 Nov 2003
Obviously the reviewer has never played Tomb Raider before... I used to play that game back in the day, and when I went to play this map I thought it was a great conversion.

It would be cool if you went into even more depth of that level. That is one of the cooler tomb raider levels, that would have quake 3 gameplay ability.

Would have been better to not have the door closed by the LG room going into the colosseum. Would have made it way more connective.....but cool conversion.

That was a terrible review though=/

Agree (1) or Disagree (0)
{DEMO}LITION unregistered
#5   09 Nov 2003
Age is irrelevant. A 15 year old could make a map for Q3 as good as a 30 year old. The only reason I released the map is because all of my ideas had gone wrong when I started the maps, but The Colosseum was the only 'gone wrong' idea that was a completed map. And I have had GTKRadiant since the end of July, and I wanted to release something in the huge amount of time I have had the editor. But Seremtan your review was rubish, because you gave little or no suggestions about improving the map. The best reviewers are the ones who can give advice and improvement points to the map's author.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Seremtan unregistered
#4   09 Nov 2003
There was no relish. I always try to make some positive suggestions for any less-than-brilliant maps I review, but I still tell it how I see it for the simple reason that a great many people have 56k and I don't see why they should d/load something only to find out the review was totally misleading. (I've been that d/loader!) Part of the problem with this map was that I really couldn't find ANYTHING good to say other than give advice. I'm sorry but that's just how it was.

If {DEMO}LITION hadn't given his age I'd have said just the same thing. If {DEMO]LITION had turned out to be a pseudonym for Nunuk, Quint, wviperw, Cardigan or any other established mapper I'd have said the same thing. Mostly no one knows the mappers age, because it's irrelevant to mention it. Somehow Dan thinks it is. We'll just have to agree to differ on that point.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Dan unregistered
#3   09 Nov 2003
So he's 15 and the reviewer still feels the need to rip it to shreds. Saying it's bad and pointing out flaws is fine, but doing it with such obvious relish is nothing short of pathetic.
Agree (1) or Disagree (0)
{DEMO}LITION unregistered
#2   09 Nov 2003
I don't really have the time to make decent maps. This (like all of my ideas) turned out worse than the original idea. But I wanted to realse it because I have had so many ideas that have failed.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Pext unregistered
#1   09 Nov 2003
dload this map for sentimental reasons; reminds of old times (descent, q1, etc :) )
Agree (1) or Disagree (0)