AAAAHH a leper texture!

If you were to try and create a photo-realistic map, it might clash with the game but as long as the whole map was done in the same style, It could be pulled off.

I find the main problem with photo-realistic maps is they tend to also have realistic shadowing.... and that is terrible for gameplay in TF2 as it tends to confuse the players.

If you like it and other players like it, GO FOR IT... the mappers on this forum almost universally tend to despise orange_x, where as hundreds/thousands of players, myself included, still find it enjoyable.

Look... Team Fortress 2 was designed to look a particular way. That 'style' is one of hand-painted, non-realistic, textures. Valve made the game like that... so when you make a map with realistic textures, you're straying from the entire style of the game.... which people (including myself) don't particularly want. You don't really have to stick to all-TF2 textures, as long as you design the texture with TF2 style standards.

... what 'tater said.

I don't care about tf2 style. Using hl2 textures is ok.

FaTony said:

I don't care about tf2 style. Using hl2 textures is ok.

Click to expand...

ya, its ok, if you don't want your map to get played or respected.... no offense

Pink_Panther said:

First welcome to mapping...

Your spot on exactly. Sometimes fresh eyes see reality better than those engrossed in a particular mindset. You also mentioned about the 'download' factor. Here's my question back to you as a new comer: Why do you make maps? Is it just to get the most downloads and get a map on every server, or is is because you have a drive to create something?


For everyone else...

I originally put this in the Off Topic section because I knew where most the responses would go, and for the most part I was correct. Just in this section it came faster than I could respond. So...I will cut the conversation short and get to the real point of starting this thread.

It has nothing to do with textures or gameplay, it comes down to a simple thing: creativity and originality. We all push different aspects of the game, make new props, new textures, new modes of play, etc and we post here because we want to share a piece of ourselves with the community in hopes that people will appreciate the efforts we all put into it.

Some of us try to create maps people 'want to play', some create maps that 'I want to play' and some push boundries simply because its fun creating something new and uniquely their own.

Most of the responses glossed over the reason for texturing with only tf2 textures by pretty much saying 'they did it that way, so I will too'. (yes, that will be offensive to many because its partially true) A small number got to the meat of this and stated very carefully why the create things the way they create them, then a couple people would follow up with statements of 'yea, what so and so said' following the continued trend of following a (pardon the phrase) cookie cutter approach to responses and mapping style. Is this creativity and origninality? I wont point fingers and its not my place as people and only answer that for themselves.

Overall, what im looking for (and so perfectly pointed out by midget31394, a new mapper to boot) is that we really need to look at maps and mapping beyond asthetics, gameplay and style and appreciate the work we all love so much.

We all make maps for different reasons, but im pretty sure nobody purposefully sat down and said 'i want to recreate valve maps' even though many do. I like to think we all want to be original and creative. If people are making an effort to do exactly that, appreciate that effort even if you may not care for that particalar change. At some point, you may want to try something new as well and will probably expect some level of appreciation as well.

Click to expand...

so if you want to use HL2 textures, art assets, etc, why not make a HL2 map? Following an art style does not restrict your creativity. For example, I made an alpine theme map that uses concrete in a large section of it. Valve barely used any concrete textures in lumberyard. So I can still be creative (admittedly this example is not EXTREMELY creative) within the confines of the art style. I am folowing valve's art style, while not trying to recreate and copy what they have done before.

First of all, do not put people who create maps in the TF2 Art Direction in a massive clump of mindless beings who just try and recreate what Valve has done. That is in no way accurate, is offensive, and makes the entire of the community except you and fatony brainless idiots who don't understand mapping. You are not the arbiter of mapping rights and wrongs, intellect and creativity, and have no authority to pass such judgment on us.

Everything I would say beyond that about art direction has already been stated. Creativity is not limited by art direction, textures, and props. Creativity is not the combination of two opposing art directions. And maps that apply the standards set by Valve in new ways, even if not in a new game mode, have attained the level of creativity I would support. Your argument is faulty and consistently challenged, has been proofed against, and your only response is to call us brainless, cookie-cutter mappers. Thanks. And I don't think texturing your map with HL2 textures reaches that "creavity" or "originality" you seem to intend.

Yes, this post is bashful, yes, it is rude, yes, I am making a point. TF2 is a game with a certain art direction, a certain gameplay, a certain style, a certain mode of being carried out, and as mappers, we should continue this, not import content from other games which clashes with Valve's finely crafted artwork under the banner of "creativity" or "originality".

Pink_Panther said:

Not sure if that moves beyond the 'keep it civil' line or not. If he wants to be different than your style, why complain? Some of us dont create maps simply because we want everyone to fall in love with it and put it on every server.

Click to expand...

Well, if that's the case, why are you bothering to release it? People don't like HL2 textures in TF2, this is a clear and given fact. If you're making these maps for yourself, or maybe you and a circle of friends, why are you bothering to argue with us? There's no point, you're not going to change peoples' opinion on this.

Nineaxis, if there was a double thanks button on this forum I would double thank you. that is exactly what I was trying to say. I guess I'm just not as articulate.

Pink panther, I didn't intend to be rude. What I meant by that was "ok, go ahead and put HL2 textures in tf2 maps. Just don't expect the map to be praised or played much"

and yeah, putting a different texture from a different game in a different spot is not necessarily creative. It's like those games that are different just to be "original", but the original idea is not fun and does not make the gameplay better.

Pink_Panther said:

Sometimes fresh eyes see reality better than those engrossed in a particular mindset.

...Most of the responses glossed over the reason for texturing with only tf2 textures by pretty much saying 'they did it that way, so I will too'. (yes, that will be offensive to many because its partially true)

...People would follow up with statements of 'yea, what so and so said' following the continued trend of following a (pardon the phrase) cookie cutter approach to responses and mapping style

...im pretty sure nobody purposefully sat down and said 'i want to recreate valve maps' even though many do.

Click to expand...

Pink_Panther said:

I think you complete missed the point... So I will just say that you are quite incorrect.

Click to expand...

What exactly are you trying to say? What point are you making? Because from your post (which I have slimmed down to certain statements I found to be rather uncalled for and inaccurate), I came to my response.

1. You state we are "engrossed in a particular mindset".
2. Apparently us stating that TF2 has a specific art direction which should be followed is glossing over your question, when we are answering it in depth
3. You state we are making cookie-cutter maps by following the art direction.
4. You state as a fact we just recreate what Valve has done.

Pink_Panther said:

While i find it interesting you put yourself into that catagory when you obviously do not, its not important.

You extracted the portions I wrote to support a point and not the point at all. The point was to get people to understand not everyone makes maps for the same reason or using the standardization that is quite prevelant in this thread. And as a result, instead of appreciating variation, many if not most choose to use de-personnalized opinion (ie things on the basis of 'only use tf2 textures, anything else is crap') to degrade others points and opinion of what mapping is about.

I admit, my post can be read as inflamitory. But, that was not the goal. Unfortunatly, without pointing out a generalized perspective the different perspective is impossible to understand. And the generalized perspective does incompass many simply because it is general. Because I point out flaws in that perspective people will always take it personal and therefor inflamitory.

There is a common demeaner in most this forum that anything that deviates from what valve would produce should be admonished but without much justification other than saying things over and over and become 'cookie cutter' statements.

I used the example of texture choice because its the most blatently admonished thing I have seen and many seem to be passionate about it. I also compaired it to changing the gameplay which is the most praised (and only one said anything about this). Both changes are equal deviations from TF2's gameplay but treated differently.

This is why i said people/and certain individuals missed the point of the thread. Its about accepting that different people have different styles.

Click to expand...

But a new gameplay type and a different art style, while similar on paper, are completely and utterly different changes. New gameplay types are welcomed by the community, and Valve, because they mix up how you play the game. Instead of capturing points or stealing the Intelligence, you're, I dunno, blowing up some objective, or holding points while your Domination meter ticks up. But with an art-style that has textures that aren't TF2-styled, it completely and utterly ruins the atmosphere of the game. Well, no, that's not entirely true. In certain cases, non-TF2 textures can work wondrously, like in PL_Zig. But it's rare, and the textures would still need to fit in TF2, at least somewhat. For me to achieve ruining TF2's atmosphere with a new gametype, however... well... it's hard for me to think of anything, but I'd guess driving vehicles would obliterate the game, but even we can't do it.

I think I speak for many people here when I say that the reason the art style is so important to the mapping of TF2 is because TF2 is a work of art

VALVe's games are some of the few games that are treated like works of art during the development process. I love valve because they treat the development of a game like a good director treats the creation of a film.

In short, TF2 is a work of art (IMO). Mapping is a work of art when done right. When you combine the two, you get something very special. We should respect the developer's game, and realize that they spent TEN LONG YEARS in the development process. Yes, most of those years were not actually technical development, but they have spent so much time coming up with an art style that lends itself to the gameplay. There are reasons for the art style, it is not just arbitrary, or because "it looks cool".

Pink_Panther said:

This is why i said people/and certain individuals missed the point of the thread. Its about accepting that different people have different styles.

Click to expand...

Then you should note that the questions in the original thread are rhetorical, because based on the original post I would have guessed the question was "why do you think my sand texture looks like ass?"

I'd also point out that using a HL2 texture is still copying what Valve does

You imply that the community thinks it's a big sin to use any non-tf2 texture. That's simply not true. It's a big sin to use a texture that is so out of place it gets noticed. Period. Texture's shouldn't really be noticed unless you find yourself wondering why it looks so great...then you examine the textures.

as an aside, i think you're ignoring valid points so that you can generalize and keep the argument going...and that you knew what was wrong with the texture when you made the first post.

This thread is a mess, so I went back and read the first post again...

Pink_Panther said:

Seriously, whats the valid reason that every texture must be a tf2 texture? Realistic textures look like crap because they are realistic?

Click to expand...

Most people have nothing against non-tf2 textures/props if they are used in the right manner. If the contrast between styles is too great it will look out of place and wierd.

Realistic textures does not look like crap by default, obviously. But they don't belong in the realm of tf2.
Imagine if the rocket launcher from Crysis were to be replaced with the tf2 equivalent, It would surely look like crap in the eyes of Crysis players. The tf2 rocket laucher is not ugly in itself, it just doesn't fit into the Crysis mold.

Here's what I don't understand: its ok to create new gameplay styles but a single texture thats not pure to the valve style isnt. Why the seperation of the two concepts?

Click to expand...

People that creates new gamemodes are not instantly praised, I would say it more of an uphill struggle where almost everyone is sceptical until it can be proven to work. If it's fun, why not play it?
The same would go for textures, If a non-tf2 texture can be used properly and it's proven to work in that environment, why not use it?

This distain even goes as far that a map 'sucks' simply because of a texture choice. What is it about the default textures that are so important but isnt important for gameplay?

Click to expand...

This is a question I can only give my personal opinion on, every individual is different after all.
Overall I think I would get a negative impression of the map if the textures in question are very noticeable. If I lose the immersion I have in the game while playing my first thing to do would be to nitpick on small details, since I would not be able to focus on the game. I can still play but I wouldn't be very psyched up. (Maybe that's why testing maps in dev textures work? Finding small problems is easier with the non-immersive gameplay...)
If it's just a single wall in the entire map that I think is badly textured it won't bother me... but depending on the scale of the 'problem' I might act differently.

I have heard the statements about how valve through out all previos things and started from scratch...but is this a valid reason to copy everything they do?

Click to expand...

I don't think mappers see themselves 'copying' valve's work. I see it as 'expanding' or 'reworking' with the existing tools and materials.
As for creating a whole new style...
Models (characters and weapons) have the same style as the props and textures, we can only change the props and textures through mapping(with custom content) but the player models can not be altered.
Having 2 different styles at the same time can, and probably will, look bad. So most mappers try to keep their custom content and maps as close to the original style as possible.

doesnt that mean exactly the thing to do is to look outside the standards and determine what is possible. This is ok for making new gameplay styles, but should it not extend beyond the arrangement of props, entities and a couple digits typed into the settings?

Click to expand...

There are many maps which are not set in the typical desert/alpine/industrial setting that valve gave us from the beginning. That proves that people are already looking outside the standards. A good example would be tc_meridian which is both custom gamemode (ctf tc) and custom setting (tropic/volcanic island). But it is a lot of work and not many people have the time or patience for a project of such scale, so the standard themes will of couse be more common.

It's important that that we don't stray too far from the original standard but it's up to each and every person to judge how far they are willing to go.

From now on my maps won't have lighting, respawnrooms or an objective. I don't want to copy VALVe you know

All newcomers can vote here:
http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?t=3299