Planning...?

[ajay]

A few questions to maybe spark some debate, inform etc.

How do people plan their maps?

Do you:

1) Have a vague idea in your head, then plough on in your editor of choice, tinkering as you go
2) Plan in rough with pen and paper, then plough on in your editor of choice, tinkering slightly less as you go
3) Plan completely with pen and grid lined paper, then copy the plan precisely in your editor of choice, tinkering with nothing as you go
4) Plan on your pc in some kind of art program, then following 3)
5) Some different way, or combinations of the above, if that is indeed possible

For my part I must confess (although I feel this is no surprise to anyone who has seen my maps) I either do no planning or very very rough planning in the form of a vague sketch.

[CocoT]

Yup, my case, too (something like number 2, thus) ... but then I'm not really a mapper

[ceriux]

i just have an idea in my head then put it into the editor, either that or i just open the editor and start going not knowing what im making belive it or not iv made quite a few good looking things just from that.

[frag.machine]

Same to me, although my best experiments with mapping always starts with a (sometimes) elaborated sketch in paper before firing the editor.

[CocoT]

Funnily enough, when I mapped for Doom2 (yes, I mapped for Doom2 (and Duke3D), quite extensively, in fact), I used to start with pretty elaborate plans on paper... which is weird, because now that I have to map for Quake (mainly through Transloquake, at this point), I don't do that so much, even though it's a lot more complex

[ceriux]

well a profecinal -sp friend of mine says your supposed to plan everything out on paper that its best for work flow or something. but iv found that i get better work results when i dont plan everything ahead of time. personally i think it all depends on the person.

[Wazat]

I think it's a person-dependent thing too. I'm a coder, but on the occasions that I want to map something out I always go in with a few vague pictures in my head but not really knowing how they'll link up. Then I hop into the editor and start playing with the idea, moving things around, putting stuff together and checking how that looks, feels, plays.

This is actually sort of like how I mod, though when I make a mod or a weapon I've usually written down the idea and fleshed it out a bit first (mostly because I want to get the idea written down before I forget stuff). However, since I almost never end up with exactly what I set out to make, I often deviate heavily or throw ideas away if they don't work in practice, and the best ideas often come in the process of implementing the original idea, I don't like to plan too much ahead.

For example, with weapons I almost never write down exact damage amounts. Instead I'll say "Blaster: moderate fire rate, fires bursts of glowey energy, each shot deals low-moderate damage. Cheap to buy, good early weapon". No exact details or anything (22 damage per shot, 0.6 fire rate, etc), just the general idea to remind me of what what in my head at the time, and some thoughts on how it fits into the weapon hierarchy etc. Diving right in with a vague or partially fleshed-out idea often works best for me, imo. Often playing with the idea and testing it out as I go will produce much more realistic plans and details than what I can come up with on paper in advance.

Same with mapping. I have an idea of what some of the rooms will look like and how the map might play, and then I want to hop into the software and start pick'n at it until I have a map.

[Entar]

Same for me. I get a general idea in my head (maybe very rarely I'll put down a basic sketch, if the idea is real complicated, or if I feel a special need to visualize it) then go at it with the editor.

[leileilol]

I sometimes prototype a map in doom or build then build off the shape in worldcraft. I can't seem to prototype straight from that program at a blank slate

[Willem]

I generally have an idea in mind in terms of theme. I know what set I want to use and the basic look of an area will form in my head. I'll create that area and then see if I can make an extension to it. If that goes well, I'll try another area. If enough of those areas flow together properly, I end up with a Quake map.

Quake mapping is generally free-form and flowing enough that you can get away with that style of working. That's one of the reasons I continue to do it. It's great to just build stuff and not have to worry about fitting into a narrative or worrying about world consistency.

[goldenboy]

My earliest attempts were roughly sketched out, then drifted into free-form. Most of them resemble Doom maps.

I did one map where I drew a pretty precise (and even symmetrical) plan on paper (the map scheduled for qexpo, which wasn't released). The result was that the map is very two-dimensional, like a Doom map. There is variation in the floor height etc, but no room over room (apart from girders). That particular map isn't bad, the fighting is fun, but the base layout is fucked.

sm141_gb was done free-form, but I had a very similar plan tbh - just not on paper, but in my head. Again, very two-dimensional map, roughly symmetrical, partly because I was going so fast.

Then I started to remake some Q2 levels, which were thoroughly two-tiered with some parts having a third tier. This was rather enlightening.

A later map that uses the WIP Remake mod was done free-form, similar to what Willem described. From the get-go, this map had two levels, one of which is mostly in the form of a walkway that twists through the entire map, accessed by a lift, with sniping monsters on it. For every area that I built, I had to find a new way to connect the second stage. Sometimes it's a ledge or platform, sometimes a bridge across slime.

That map is a lot better than the pre-planned ones.

So in my case, pre-planning (sketching) seems to result in more 2D maps. Sketching a multi-tiered map would be pretty elaborate, I assume.

[jim]

I've usually done maps without planning. Even if I draw some sketch on a paper, the end result is not like the stuff in the paper, except for some little parts. Sometimes I like planning them on paper.

I've thought that I would make some maps into paper. I would make them so that one paper got floor 1, another got floor 2, etc.. that might work for Quake map planning.

Sometimes I've drawn some perspective images of areas that I'll make into maps.

[SamUK]

I might be the weird one , but i make a very basic 3d model of the map in 3ds max.If i like the idea i would go on to making a detailed 3ds model of the map and then use that as a reference to make the map in worldcraft.

[Electro]

I follow a few steps based on my experience over the years these have tended to work out best. Of course each level will spend a different amount of time in each step... but this is the basic overview.

1. Research
2. Sketching
3. Blockout
4. Testing & Revision
5. Aesthetics

For a more detailed breakdown of what each step contains, just check out my website: http://www.bendarling.net/index.php?page=levels

Like Willem said, if something doesn't flow or isn't right, it just gets changed and evolves. This is why blockout, testing and revisions are so crucial.

[jim]

I might be the weird one , but i make a very basic 3d model of the map in 3ds max.If i like the idea i would go on to making a detailed 3ds model of the map and then use that as a reference to make the map in worldcraft.

I did that once in a school for some hl2 map. Teacher requested a 3dsmax mockup... For that, I had also prototyped the map in Doom... but the teacher was sort of underestimating that prototype map.. which I think gave me more directions on how I want the map look like.