I'd like to post a modded Valve map

Status
Not open for further replies.

grazr

Old Man Mutant Ninja Turtle
aa
Mar 4, 2008
5,441
3,814
Ultimately, I think maybe the reason tf2maps.net frowns on non-completely-original maps is because, with this forum layout that you've got for posting maps, it's very easy to be overwhelmed. The site simply doesn't scale that well in terms of acting as a directory. So if you had too many 2fort_rain maps on here, you'd lose track. Having said that, I'm not really convinced that there _are_ a lot of modified Valve maps. On FPSBanana, mine is the only modified Lumberyard except for some kind of achievements map.

Forum layout has nothing to do with it. Infact it has recently been improved with an added map mode search ability and map thread prefix's; and before that, become its very own section modified specifically for map promotion. Rather than the "[WIP]" threads we had in the past. It's also not that people can't be arsed to search through 50 different 2fort_rain maps, it's that they can't be arsed to search through any 'converted' map at all. There's just no interest in it and each time one appears it offends anyone who released an original Beta for testing.

It all starts off as "a good idea", or "Wouldn't it be cool". When the fact is half these people have no idea what they are doing/talking about. They have no knowlegde of the game engine they are delving into and only imply the answer to the question asked by so many that do not occupy the custom content scene; as to whether this is accepted, normal practice, as "yes". When ettiquette surely tells you otherwise.

I've already given you the general consensus as to why most tf2maps.net members frown upon unoriginal material, and that is that it is A) offensive and B) unnecassery.

If you intended to learn something from it (and even if you didn't) there's still no reason to release it to the public.

Do some private testing, post up some questions and maybe some screenshots in the "mapping discussion" forum and put forward a thesis or synopsis of some kind and have a real discussion about it's validity.

I realise i'm cutting you off a little short here as you did include a question as to this very situation with your submission. But this is your answer. As Booj' said: You can submit your map to the database. But don't expect much of a response from the community beyond "make something original".

I'm not going to tell you your maps crap. Afterall, technically it's not your map. But please, for the love of god, make your own map based off of this inspirational idea.

As for the question as to how many re-hashed Valve maps there are in existance, the only answer is too many. Arena maps generally don't get re-hashed, infact most maps get made into arena. So you probably wouldn't find many custom versions of arena_lumberyard.
 

Grimes

L1: Registered
Jun 4, 2009
45
4
I agree that Valve released their maps to be used as a tool and aide in learning Hammer and to examine what goes into a full, complete ,and professional map. However I think it is entirely improper to declare any modification of a Valve map and uploading it as "cheap and unoriginal". Yes I would frown upon modifying a weather effect, just changing textures, and a simple adaptation of a map for a different gamemode. But, if they go in and change things up abit I believe you shouldn't shut your mind completely on their idea. Give the map a chance, if a user just makes a version of 2fort_rain and all they added was rain, then so be it. They didn't learn very much from their experience, but they probably learned at least something from it. However if they did 2fort_rain, and changed parts of its design, maybe made it a CP map, and added rain I would give it a fair opportunity to form an opinion on the changes they made.
 

Ankh

L3: Member
Sep 18, 2008
114
41
That still wouldn't change the fact it was originally Valve's map and not an original creation. The problem with allowing it when it's recognizably a Valve map is it's a slippery slope - where does one draw the line and say "this is different enough to be considered a new map"? It's not so much close mindedness as it is simple quality control.
Also, if it plays differently, is great fun and is changed from the original design enough to be considered "not a cheap and unoriginal copy", why not just make it into a new map with a new design that isn't ripping off something of Valve's? Then people will say "this person made a great map" rather than "this person got lazy and copied Valve". In fact that's exactly why they were released - inspiration and experimentation. If 2Fort's layout inspires your CP map somehow and you create something new and interesting that somewhat resembles two bases with a bridge between them and some sewers but ostensibly isn't 2Fort that's fine and uses the maps for their intended purpose, but I hardly think Valve wants you to just stick a CP on the bridge, make it rain, raise the water level a bit then claim it as your own.
 

Mokagogo

L1: Registered
Jun 21, 2009
32
1
I agree that they don't want you to claim it as your own (and who would believe you? Everyone knows which the official maps are). Other than that, from what they said, it sounds like those are exactly the sort of things they want you to do.

I take your point about comparing completely new and modded maps. I could have made a Lumberyard clone out of 'my own' (Valve's) materials and with a structure very similar, but in some 'key' way different. And where I've wanted to design a map very different from Valve's (cf. cp_airport_hall_b9, as at http://www.fpsbanana.com/maps/53261), I've done that. The thing is, all I really want to do in this case was have a version of Lumberyard with Payload Race, and it didn't make sense to me to start from scratch just to achieve that.

I'm also happy to admit that I'd like to maybe create an alpine-style map in the future, and perhaps I'll go back and look at lumberyard in more depth from a geometry point of view, at some stage, in order to improve my chances with the art style of such a project.

My next map project -- my fourth -- is going to be completely original, again. I think I qualify as a 'real mapper' simply because my next map idea actually came to me in a dream... That's right, a dream about a TF2 map :p The only problem is going to be that I think I'm going to need some pretty intense logic work in order for it to do the things I want. Does anyone know if you can generate random numbers with Hammer entities? Or alternatively, get the current server timestamp (which can be used as a very basic random number)?
 

Dr. Spud

Grossly Incandescent
aa
Mar 23, 2009
880
854
I think this thread has become

(Moderator edit: A picture may be worth a thousand words, but an image macro is rarely worth even one. Please try to actually contribute something to the discussion.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

What Is Schwa

L6: Sharp Member
Jan 13, 2008
375
445
Where do we draw the line regarding original material? Is taking an old map from a different game and updating it to TF2 (mach, warpath) also "offensive" in the same way?

It is hard for me to get worked up about people tweaking Valve maps and I think there could be good things that come from it. For example, I'd love to see Hydro refit with Shmitz's CTF+TC mode. Or, failing that, Hydro with the diagonal stages removed and setup time added for the last stages.
 

Dr. Spud

Grossly Incandescent
aa
Mar 23, 2009
880
854
Fair enough.

I think this thread has become pointless pecking between two viewpoints that clearly aren't going to change their stances, and it's mostly based in speculation of a press release. Hence, the wharrgarbl.
 
Last edited:

drp

aa
Oct 25, 2007
2,273
2,628
Like its been posted.

Modifications of Valve maps are allowed here (Rules are to be updated to include this soon), but be warned. Most of the users frown upon this. So user beware.

ps. Frowning upon does not mean a free license to berate and abuse another fellow member.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.