r33t ownAge
r33t ownAge by Nathan Silvers
Add a comment
**Preview only**
Be sure to submit your comment
Submitting comment...
raspatan Rep. 4259
#32   02 Dec 2020
Average textures but interesting design. The main room is quite nice, with its different floors and connectivity. Overall, map was fun to play. The only problem is item placement. In 5 seconds you can get the RA, RG and quad. Such powerful items should have been more spread around (RG swaped for the RL). It's not super strafe friendly either (in terms of cealing high). This could have been much better with some minor tweaks.
Edited 12.82 hours after the original posting.
Agree (2) or Disagree (0)
OmniSmash unregistered
#31   21 Jun 2000
Well, the main thing this map has going for it is it's connectivity; not a dead end to be found in sight ;)

Graphically, reminds me of more than a few fine Quake 2 maps I've played in the past ( before I deleted it that is :) )

Maybe that's the main thing lacking here IMO, the visual appeal that we enjoy in Quake 3; perhaps a bit more attention to architecture would benefit the map as a whole, though not at the cost of frames.

Good map, gets an 8 from me.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
MogWaEE unregistered
#30   19 Jun 2000
I love this map, it has it all:

-gameplay, connectivity (despite the size)

-great visuals

-...and more.

My only grippe is that the bots seem to congregate in one area.

my rating: 8.5, upped to a 9!

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Patridiot unregistered
#29   19 Jun 2000
I'm with RedFive, this is my kinda map. Large but with such good connectivity that you are almost never looking for a fight. The map is rife with cut off points making for some really fun strategic fights. I only hope that the guy who runs my server adds it to the list bec ause BOTS DO NOT DO THE GAMEPLAY JUSTICE.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Tyre unregistered
#28   18 Jun 2000
Pretty good for a first map, and speaking as one who generally favours small maps, this is a well laid-out large map. One or two spots could have been lit a bit better.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
RedFive unregistered
#27   18 Jun 2000
Now a map like THIS is what I prefer! I give this map an 8, 'cuz it could have been a tad more colorful, but the gameplay is there.

As for the Gamespy network, I can't believe how a network with so much quality can be so sloppy with it's connection to the web. I can't count the number of times FilePlanet as been fked up in the past WEEK !!!

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Sting unregistered
#26   18 Jun 2000
I remembered trying out this map in the beta section, though I'm not sure I commented there. Anyhow, I like it, not my fav... but still very fun. As far as LvL loading slow, I've found that all PQ hosted sites have been a bit slow as of late, so I'd blame GameSpy, as we all know that they do have these probs. sometimes. =)
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
not entered unregistered
#25   18 Jun 2000
I also am finding the loading of these pages exceptionally slow. Unlikely that it is my connection as I normally visit this site regularly and pages usually load quickly.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
grind unregistered
#24   17 Jun 2000
Nice map. Fun with about 6 players. Nice frame rates throughout and connectivity was good for a map this size. Giving it a 7.

Tig: The site IS slow today BTW. Really slow. Also, would it be possible to get .5's into the scores sometime in the future? I find myself wanting to give 7.5's or 8.5's quite often.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Tigger-oN unregistered
#23   17 Jun 2000
The ip# is not effecting the speed the page loads, the code change is tiny (the site was designed to display ip#s from the start)

Steinecke - if you notcied, your B Class is the same each time, but your A Class has changed, true. Mandog and I are working on something a bit better than ip# it should be ready soon.

We are also working on a few other changes, but this has nothing to do with the map - which I still think is great for 7+ player games.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
doh unregistered
#22   17 Jun 2000
maybe thats becoz u have a dynamic ip?? doh......
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Steinecke unregistered
#21   17 Jun 2000
If this is the result of the ip-stuff -it's useless, anyway; look at my ip-number: it changes.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Steinecke unregistered
#20   17 Jun 2000
Tigger and Mandog should speed up their site, instead of playing Orwell. LvL is too slow since yesterday. I'm not willing to wait a whole minute for the opening a a site!
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
g@mer unregistered
#19   17 Jun 2000
Damn right..
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
itsuxtobeyu0 unregistered
#18   17 Jun 2000
wtf are these guys on?? This is one fucking brilliant map, the reviewer was right, this is the kinda map i could play on and on. Btw nice detail 'borrowing' the things near the red armour in dm2 :P, its nice to see you can get to the rail without rj once in a while.

keep it up man, this map rox!!

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
nunuk (nicolas bouvier) unregistered
#17   17 Jun 2000
very interesting map concerning the layout. what i really like the most are the tubes that we see throughout the openings in the walls.nice detail.

however item placement looks kind of weird sometimes.

i'll give it a 6 or 7.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Natestah unregistered
#16   17 Jun 2000
Hi, thank you all for downloading this. Being my first DM level I don't think its doing too bad, I suckered 1000 People into downloading it!!! =) (and so far a few have liked it). I'll probably spend more time with the next level I do in the beta forum ironing out those nasty zwiggly's. Also I'll refrain from experimenting with tongues and things that just "don't make sense" or "just because I could". I'm thinking now that I should have stuck with the name "Natestah's Q3 Experiment" instead of "r33t ownage".

Reworking this map for zwigglies?? I don't know.. is it worth your re-downloading?


Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Scampie unregistered
#15   17 Jun 2000
BTW, that was a joke about the title... I'm not that mean as to take away points for a gayed title.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Scampie unregistered
#14   17 Jun 2000
hmm... the word 'r33t' in the title... -1 point for just that. =P

And i just look at the screen and i can tell how much this map really doesn't have any detail, the 'rocky' cliff up by the sky is completly flat! and if this did go thru the beta section, then nobody helped him at all if there are noticable 'z-fighting' errors. hell, you should look thru your own map to find those.

ill give it a 6

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Steinecke unregistered
#13   17 Jun 2000
I'm not interested in that childish sentimental sermon 'bout the 'good old days'; Q1 and Q2 are completely outdated. This map is outdated, too: looks blocky as hell. This maps author just wasn't able to take advantage of the modern Q3A-engine. And overlapping textures are not ok, anyway.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Blitzz unregistered
#12   17 Jun 2000
Steinecke what's the matter? What the hell is wrong with something Q2ish? You one of those "I play q1 and q2 suxx!" guy I frequently encounter?

May I remind you you even tho q2 has its flaws, it was also a great tactical game. Q3:A combines the speed of q1 and the tactical influence from Q2 into itself, and I see no problem with a level being "Q2ish".

The flickering textures is indeed irritating and I hope that Nathan reworks the level after these comments.

I'm missing your mostly constructing criticism here

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Steinecke unregistered
#11   17 Jun 2000
This is an very ugly construction; uses Q3A- engine fore looking Q2ish: Great!

I really like those overlapping textures, it's this kind of flickering, which makes me


Maybe, this map looks ok on a graphicsboard made of wood.

The reviewer should invest in some technical development, wich would make him able, to make a more useful decision on the way a new map looks.

Another prblem,Mr Tigger: I need five more ip-numbers (for Steinecke, Lord Stephen Stonecorner, undeaDDisney, Quadaffi, Shirley 'Headshot' Quadmuffin). They promised me, never -NEVER! to place useless crap on a comments-page!

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
not entered unregistered
#10   16 Jun 2000
Some very nice architectural detail in this map, also level has a structure that is likely to make for interesting gameplay. The arena is of significant size and therefore would require large numbers of players to make gameplay exciting.

The over use of the same wall stone really detracts from the aesthetic appeal of this, and it looks rather bland. Could have been so much better looking if designer had used a greater variation of textures.

Giving this one a score of 7

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
not entered unregistered
#9   16 Jun 2000
Downloading this map now, hope it's as good as Tig intimated.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Napoleon (Capt) unregistered
#8   16 Jun 2000
A new wonder drug called IP seems to have helped cure my multiple personality disorder; Tig is up there with Alexander Fleming.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
MEet-CEes unregistered
#7   16 Jun 2000
this map was in the beta section i liked it alot but lost a slight interest when the Rail was moved.i did not have bot problems though. now lets get started on Natedm2!
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Octovus unregistered
#6   16 Jun 2000
2 eachs own Patridiot...I'll admit I've probably said that in the past (I think I did in Ancient Archipelago, but there it wasn't so much meant as a bad thing) but here the size just killed it imh(umble)o.

Bots didn't move around enough, health was somewhat scarce..but J Law has a good point, I'll give this one another go in TDM.

Didn't happen to turn my crank

(Note I did say in my previous comment "But hey, I can see how people could really like it =)")

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Johnny Law unregistered
#5   16 Jun 2000
P.S. I do agree about the mouth being out of place, and I just generally don't like the skull-baseboard textures, but on the whole the texturing and lighting makes for a good clean look here. Not hit-you-between-the-eyes busy and colorful like (for example) ztn3dm1, but the more restrained approach has its good points too.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
RiO unregistered
#4   16 Jun 2000
Smells good.... BTW, Tigger, nice idea about the IP addresses. Too many people are two people :>
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Johnny Law unregistered
#3   16 Jun 2000
Mark this one up for one of the few good custom team DM maps.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Patridiot unregistered
#2   16 Jun 2000
Dude, just because you like small maps doesn't mean that big maps are bad. I see you lodging that complaint all the time. Review it for what it is, not what you wish it would be. It's like saying "The Grapes of Wrath sucks because I don't like to read books." Get it?
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Octovus unregistered
#1   16 Jun 2000
Well I gotta disagree with the reviewers once again..hasn't happened in a while.

First of all, it looks bland. The Dm6 textures just don't transfer well imho. But more importantly, the weapon placement was kind of off. Pg in basement, rg in sniping post that no one ever walked by, at least not bots, and (kill me if I'm wrong) no gl. This map is BEGGING for a gl. (Sorry if there is one, neither bots nor I found it)

The rl was well placed, quad was too, but the organic mouth brush was just out of place in this level. I did like the little wall insets featuring pipes (spewing lava and whatnot)

Just a little big, and none too bot friendly from what I saw. But hey, I can see how people could really like it =)

6 outa 10

L8rs! Octovus

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)