Slashdot Mirror
Randomized Maps in Team Fortress 2 Explained
Given the amount of time that gamers have been playing the original Team Fortress, it's no wonder that Valve has designed the upcoming Team Fortress 2 with longevity in mind. One aspect of that design process is map layout: a randomization algorithm will reconfigure the map every time a game is launched. The result will be a multiplayer game requiring much more than simple map memorization and sniper rifle spawn camping. The post on Computer and Videogames offers a video featuring project lead Robin Walker describing the complicated process of making every random map work well. "As for how the dynamic maps work in practice, that was hard to judge. The match we played on Hydro, the first map to use this special game mode, was enormous fun. But as extensive as our playtest was, they didn't let us play on the map for three years, and that's the kind of heavy use under which this system should flourish. What we did notice is that this is not just a Battlefield type system with some control points 'locked'. When a point is not in play, routes to that section of the map are physically blocked off, so the physical shape of the map is different for every combination of points. That forces you to revise your mental picture of the map, and see it as fresh again."
That's been a long time in coming. Halo 3 multi-player developers take note...
Deja Moo: The distinct feeling that you've heard this bull before.
I never understood why they had specific places where the player respawned. While you'd want to ensure that you didn't respawn someone right above a hole, it makes more sense to just respawn the player in a random location. Except in CTF where the player should always be spawned at their base.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Am I the only one that hates randomly generated maps? I know the concept is becoming popular, and I certainly don't like campers any more than the next guy, but I find it really just not fun to play on a map that constantly changes.
Haiku for you!
Is it just me, (and no, I didn't RTFA) but does the brief summary seem to indicate they are doing basically the same thing that racing games do to reuse a track (but with a little randomness instead of being "fixed"). For example, in the NFS series, when you go around a track during level 1, there is a concrete wall that blocks of a portion of a track. Then, in level 2, you get the same location, but the concrete wall is moved so that you can travel down that piece of the track.
Still cool. But not as much memorization as they imply.....
Layne
Sounds like a great idea to me but I have one question. Can I have an @ for my player mesh?
That's a good way to avoid being labeled a terrorist for drawing the "wrong" kind of map that might resemble a school or government installation.
What?
This is part of the ongoing trend to reduce the advantage of skill and make outcomes more random.
The elements of skill at FPSs:
1. Twitch
2. Map control
3. Enemy prediction
4. Self unpredictability
Twitch is pretty much dead now that FPSs are designed for consoles, and usually running at 30fps. Success at twitch requires good genetics (fast reaction time is critical), and obsessive training (so it can become subconscious, if you have to think you'll be to slow), so understandably it is not popular with all gamers. Therefore the game designers add autoaim and weapon spread to make it less important.
Map control requires great memorization and 3d visualization skills. You need to know where every chokepoint, every item spawn, every enemy spawn is, and be able to instantly visualize every route between any two arbitrary points on the map. This isn't so limited by genetics, but if still requires a lot of effort, and again repels the "casual" gamers. Randomizing the maps makes this skill less important.
At the tactical level, enemy prediction and self unpredictability are closely related to map control. There's a constant tension between needing to control the map and avoiding predictable behavior. Things like knowing high traffic areas to fire a rocket into without looking, and knowing where an enemy is most likely to appear after seeing them briefly all depend on map knowledge. These last two skills are not completely eliminated by random maps, only reduced to skill at highly local movement.
Map randomization helps reduce multiplayer FPS from a legitimate competitive sport to just another amusement.
Dynamic maps make the game smarter. You can no longer play a map endlessly till you have it so memorized you can do it in your sleep.
This adds another aspect to playing the game. You know what you have to do, but now you also need to explore the map and find the weapons, find the best choke points all while the other team is doing the same thing. And you have to do this every single time.
Team communication is going to be even more important now. Your team will have to be dynamic and adaptable to not only the enemy, but to the terrain as well.
As far as I'm concerned, eliminating the blind rush to see who can get the super weapon/power up first is a good thing. Making players think more is not making the game dumber. People who don't like to think, who don't like new challenges every time they enter the game, won't like it.
I stopped playing FPS' because I was bored with the maps. People played the same maps over and over and over and over. It was always a mad rush to the same known locations. While that can be fun too, after a while I need some variety.
"The avalanch has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote." -Kosh
I hate systems that handicap success. They also tend to lead to no team winning ever, which is even less fun than getting stomped by a stacked team. If one team works together better, has better players, or is just plain lucky they deserve to win. Arbitrarily bolstering a weaker opponent provides goes against the very nature of competition.
I know the map sequence 99% of the servers in Half-Life TFC by heart. It's easy!
2fort
2fort
2fort
2fort
2fort
That was my biggest gripe of Half Life TFC: Almost no map variety. You were almost always guaranteed to play 2fort. It was the de_dust of TFC. It got boring after awhile.
I enjoyed the other maps like the attack/defense map where you would have the attacking team going literally at a snail's pace towards the flag due to all the crossfire. It was great. Favorite map? The map of the gigantic living room where snipers frequently stood in the bookshelf.
In terms of multiplayer-PC game maps, Multi Theft Auto is great. Tons of maps(Deathmatch and race), most of them suck, but still fun to play. They load literally in a second, being grafted onto San Andreas. Now only if the combat(ie get out of your car) MTA will surface.
GTA2->3 is an interesting example.
The main gameplay sections actually aren't that different between the 2! In fact this is most obvious in GTA3, which had an "overhead" camera mode that made it look surprisingly close to 2. Really, the difference is mostly camera angle, and being able to do a bit more vertically. (And, I'd say, drive a lot faster since then you could see where you were going!)
The real difference, IMO, was that *cutscenes* were now in the same 3D engine, instead of just voiceover phonecalls and what not. This compelled the designers to make the games rather more linear... branching, a tad, but linear. I never got deeply into 2 but I think it had a lot more flexibility in what missions you took and which gang you sided with. I know some people who say 2 is better than 3 for that kind of reason.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
Map memorization is what people are currently used to. Does it make a game smarter? No. Does it make it more fun? For some people it undoubtedly does. For me it only means that after a while I become bored with it.
You're right about one thing. Psychology would change. Instead of running straight to the choke point you know about, you have to find a choke point and then wonder if maybe your opponent may have found a different way in. Every time through it's a whole new game.
When I state I don't play anymore because people only ever want to play on the same maps, I'm basically stating that I'm bored with it. I know where the power-ups are. I know where the choke points are. The only thrill left at that point is if my opponent is actually better than me. When I stopped playing I was frequently accused of using an aim-bot. I never did. I was just good.
I would also say that tennis is boring for pretty much the same reason. The field is same every match, the only excitement comes from an opponent who is challenging.
A FPS where the map was different each and every match? Now here's a new challenge every time. Even if your opponent isn't as good as you, you also have to play against the terrain. In my opinion it ups the skill required to play effectively. It also means that pure twitch alone doesn't guarantee a win. A team that can identify and use terrain quickly and effectively can beat a team that can't.
"The avalanch has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote." -Kosh
The memorization is the prerequisite for playing the *real* game
No, you're just being closed mined about it. What the game is simply changes. As for the skills you mentioned above, they all still play in to a random map:
1. Twitch
It's an FPS, this will always be part of the game. If anything, the randomness is going to emphasize this further. It takes little in the way of quick reaction to fire a rocket at a known location when you see the enemy. On the other hand, if you don't know where that enemy is going to come from, it's going to take a lot of speed and accuracy to get the first shot off.
2. Map control
Again, not gone at all. You will still need to control the map, you'll just have to learn how to do it on the fly. Yes, this means that you won't have the well developed strategies which come about from well known maps. But ignoring your terrain will still be fatal. What it does mean is that you will have to be more adaptable. You will have to find and control choke points, not just rush them. Also, the sniping camper will be in for a lot more trouble when someone discovers an easy way to him.
3. Enemy prediction
This one will be diminished a bit. You won't know what the enemy is doing, because there won't be several well hashed out tactics that each side uses every time. you will, instead, have to figure this out each time. There will still be base assumptions, it's still an FPS, and there will still be certain objectives (assuming non-deathmatch play). This seems like a good thing to me. I've spent too many hours playing the exact same map, with both sides using the exact same tactic, the result coming out as much to luck as anything else.
4. Self unpredictability
It's a random map, this should be a playground of unpredictability.
The problem isn't the idea, it's just that you are stuck in the "memorize and own the map" mentality. The game will be different, no doubt, but just discarding it out of hand because it's not what you are used to is just dumb.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
This feature has been in the source engine for awhile. In fact it is used on 1 map for Counter-Strike Source. On the map cs_Havana, there are 3 routes from the CT spawn to the Hostages. On this map there are 6 choke points that may or may not be closed always allowing at least 1 path to the objective. Funny thing is this map is rarely played, and this feature is somewhat un-noticed by the players.
Granted what they are going for seems a little more ambitious for TF2, but feature like that are what internet based FPS's need to progress and become better. TF has also been one of the few FPS's that truly utilize height in map making, something that is lacking in most CS maps...
---In a time of Chimpanzees I was a Monkey.