StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

User avatar

Xenon
Zerg Queen's Nest Slave Trainee
Zerg Queen's Nest Slave Trainee
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:29 pm
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby Xenon » Sun May 23, 2010 10:54 am

Yes, the censor is the most disgusting part. My project doesn't have much of a story, but it is a multiplayer map so is subject to this idiocy. "cockpit" is censored and "scrape" probably is too. I'm kinda surprised "button" isn't censored like it used to be on the forums.

Chances are you can backdoor it in many trigger-defined areas by combining strings, making it even more pointless and stupid.

I'ma go out and get Mario Galaxy 2, and hope Blizzard gives us some answers by the time I'm finished.

But I doubt it.

User avatar

RazorclawX
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 1595
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 7:19 pm
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby RazorclawX » Sun May 23, 2010 12:19 pm

The fact that they're actively trying to censor these things now makes Blizzard liable for any obscene content that happens to slip by.

Keep in mind they weren't ever in this position previously.
Image
-- Razorclaw X
Creator of Wanderers of Sorceria and Vision of the Future

User avatar

IskatuMesk
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 8776
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: M͈̙̞͍͞ͅE̹H̨͇̰͈͕͇̫Ì̩̳CO̼̩̤͖͘
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby IskatuMesk » Sun May 23, 2010 4:13 pm

Xelxiuz wrote:So if I'm getting this straight, it's not possible to host a map on battle.net without that map being published? What about just your own party/lobby or invitation only? Something like DOTA is 6.8 mb atm and rising, I can't see how 10/20 mbs could fit quality custom maps that push the limit, no matter how compressed/streamlined they made the features.


Local hosting does not exist period.

I'd suggest to many here that there are creative workarounds with everything.  If you want to talk about 'suicide' or 'god', you may refer to them differently. 


Oh for fuck's sake THIS SHOULD NOT BE NECESSARY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE. Jesus Christ this is the stupidest bullshit I've seen yet out of this clusterfuck braindead editor. What moron is running this business, anyway?

How many maps in WC3 without custom sounds or other enhancements would be above 10mb?  My guess is less than 1%, if even at that.  The maps of SC2 shouldn't be that much larger, and if they are, my guess is that Blizzard would eventually concede to larger file sizes if the community demand were both reasonable and plentiful. 


Desler ol' buddy lemme let you in on some technical details, okay? Because I know this isn't your foray and I know it's probably not that clear to you.

In warcraft a unit has one texture (usually). You can call multiple textures if you want to, like for particles, and you can get by. People skirt around this size limit by producing extremely ugly, low-poly low-resolution garbage that looks TERRIBLE. You can't do what RCX does and use custom textures for all of your new shit. But wc3 only has ONE texture per unit that is mandatory - diffuse, and they are often very low resolution. You CAN go higher res (I used WoW graphics in LoL) but most people are too petrified of it.

In a new engine, let's say Sc2, you've got more textures to worry about. Oh, and they're DDS, so they've also got mipmap data as well.

Diffuse
Specular
Emissive (Lightmap)
Normal

They often have other maps, too. For example, the Carrier has a second set of custom maps for its short death animation. Their resolution is also much higher - easily going up to 1024x1024. This is STANDARD and has been for many years.

In order to make any significant project you would have to abandon custom graphics as a whole or reduce your custom graphics to such a low point in quality that there is no point in even having them. In wc3 I consider WoW graphics the minimum level of quality of custom content I want to be adding into the game - I want the game to look BETTER, not WORSE.

Additionally, voice acting. You and I both know that custom sounds can take a lot space, especially if you want full-blown dialogue. Better luck in another game bro, half of 10mb is easily going into map data BEFORE any custom content.

In Wc3 I had a map that was 120mb. I used an external exe. This will no doubt be necessary in sc2, but no way would I ever make a multiplayer project in this game.

Worse yet is they still have the gall to call this a mod system when it isn't and doesn't in any way facilitate mod-like projects.

/edit

I'd also like to mention that to do stuff like have doodads that randomize between a non-standard set of doodads you'll be re-importing every related asset to that doodad, textures, model and all.
Last edited by IskatuMesk on Sun May 23, 2010 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image~[Gameproc]~Image
Warning: dialogue contains politically incorrect content. Viewer rearsore may occur.

User avatar

Marco
Xel'naga Hero
Xel'naga Hero
Posts: 1470
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:31 pm
Location: Fort Worth
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby Marco » Sun May 23, 2010 5:01 pm

It definitely isn't going to cater with mods that have any sort of custom graphics or sound, which in this community is pretty much the entirety of most mod.  I suppose they either jumped the gun and promised features and failed to delivery, or there will be a different way to facilitate mods that can't be seen in the beta.  The former looks more likely, although the latter is possible

It's unfortunate if it turns out to be non-viable, but even in retrospect, its still offering a feature rich area in a (from my perspective) easy to use editor.  Yes, it sucks if you have to work around a lot of stuff to get other stuff to work.  Keep lighting a fire under them, maybe they'll listen.  But if not, just be ready to accept it.  I get the impression that this editor will be built upon heavily in the future, especially once the ball gets rolling - its merely that the focus seems to have been on the game.
The Music of Squad 303  (Celestial Reverie Music by Joel Steudler)

Anise McConnell
Bryce Littlefield
Issac Rangel
Tyson Reznor

"That mutalisk must have seen your stoic beauty glistening in its eye and tried to die looking at an angel in heaven."
-- Bryce Littlefield

User avatar

IskatuMesk
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 8776
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: M͈̙̞͍͞ͅE̹H̨͇̰͈͕͇̫Ì̩̳CO̼̩̤͖͘
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby IskatuMesk » Sun May 23, 2010 5:59 pm

I know change is coming to the editor (how much I don't know), but the editor and battle.net are two entirely different teams. This is something that, if it does not change, will kill everything that kept games like wc3 and NWN alive for as long as they have been (to this day).
Image~[Gameproc]~Image
Warning: dialogue contains politically incorrect content. Viewer rearsore may occur.

User avatar

Marco
Xel'naga Hero
Xel'naga Hero
Posts: 1470
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:31 pm
Location: Fort Worth
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby Marco » Sun May 23, 2010 6:02 pm

Ah hell, it'll be alright!  Don't worry.  I would guarantee that this game would last that long - but I don't like issuing guarantees for various legal reasons.  But that assurance is almost as good as a guarantee.  And you can take that to the bank! 
The Music of Squad 303  (Celestial Reverie Music by Joel Steudler)

Anise McConnell
Bryce Littlefield
Issac Rangel
Tyson Reznor

"That mutalisk must have seen your stoic beauty glistening in its eye and tried to die looking at an angel in heaven."
-- Bryce Littlefield

User avatar

IskatuMesk
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 8776
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: M͈̙̞͍͞ͅE̹H̨͇̰͈͕͇̫Ì̩̳CO̼̩̤͖͘
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby IskatuMesk » Sun May 23, 2010 6:32 pm

I hope you're a rich man. That bank is going to get leveled.
Image~[Gameproc]~Image
Warning: dialogue contains politically incorrect content. Viewer rearsore may occur.

User avatar

WB
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:46 pm
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby WB » Sun May 23, 2010 8:14 pm

I want to point out that they've mentioned that DOTA-level stuff made in SC2 is not considered "premium content" worthy because it doesn't use custom content enough. ie, they are expecting more custom assets from users, not less (and well, they should. that skillset is a little bit more common now).

I think the problem is whoever set the limit just looked at DOTA and said "Yea, double it, that'll be enough."

But Mesk is right about the asset sizes. This sounds like a decision that was made by people that don't quite know what they are talking about, or doing.

But its totally cool. The good news is, you guys are bunch of modders. Remember that? When the fuck has a limitation ever bothered you before? This is the point where you start thinking about tools that need to be made, start making contacts, begin planning a project that will work around the limitations - as you have always done. Yea, there are going to be features that suck, there are going to be things you fucking HATE. But whats new? We do this because its a hobby, at least thats why I got into. The tool has never been perfect, because its never been a tool made for us, its never been easy for us, but thats not why we started.

So yea, its gonna suck, but its still up to you to make gold out of shit. Don't let me down. :)
Now with 50% more lol, 50% more win, and 100% phlail.
www.sc2campaigns.net - Coming Soon!!

User avatar

IskatuMesk
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 8776
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: M͈̙̞͍͞ͅE̹H̨͇̰͈͕͇̫Ì̩̳CO̼̩̤͖͘
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby IskatuMesk » Sun May 23, 2010 8:30 pm

I dunno man. We are modders, but we're also human. You can only throw so much shit at us before we snap.

I've also confirmed that the guy running b.net 2.0's team is the same guy who was running Xbox Live.
Image

Take a good look, gentlemen. This is the face of your destroyer.
Image~[Gameproc]~Image
Warning: dialogue contains politically incorrect content. Viewer rearsore may occur.

User avatar

mAc Chaos
Zerg Zergling Groomer
Zerg Zergling Groomer
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:11 am
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby mAc Chaos » Sun May 23, 2010 9:01 pm

My reaction to these developments:

Image

So I guess this means I'll mess around with SC2 once every few weeks, at most.  It's not really looking like it's going to turn into a game we can all pour ourselves into, like Starcraft was.
http://sanctuary-inc.net/

User avatar

Topic author
UntamedLoli
Protoss Infested Terran (Unemployed)
Protoss Infested Terran (Unemployed)
Posts: 838
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:36 pm
Location: Canada, BC
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby UntamedLoli » Sun May 23, 2010 11:28 pm

WB wrote:But its totally cool. The good news is, you guys are bunch of modders. Remember that? When the fuck has a limitation ever bothered you before?


Personally I've been looking for more or less an upgraded WC3 when it came to custom maps and even trying to make my own which I havn't really done since WC2 but thanks to the retards behind battle.net that probobly won't happen.
Image
Image

User avatar

Maglok
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 1313
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 12:48 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby Maglok » Mon May 24, 2010 9:44 am

I have a question: If you want to play a published map hosted by someone else, does that mean you will have to DL those max 10MB? Cause then it seems like a bit of an ok limitation to me. I do not want to have to download like 50MB just to play a multiplayer map. That can take quite a while depending on your connection.
- Maglok
Audio engineer and writer
SC2 campaign dev ranting: The Bunker blog

User avatar

Ricky_Honejasi
Xel'naga Solar Moderator
Xel'naga Solar Moderator
Posts: 2023
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:50 pm
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby Ricky_Honejasi » Mon May 24, 2010 10:11 am

Maglok wrote:I have a question: If you want to play a published map hosted by someone else, does that mean you will have to DL those max 10MB? Cause then it seems like a bit of an ok limitation to me. I do not want to have to download like 50MB just to play a multiplayer map. That can take quite a while depending on your connection.


Yes, it would mean a max DL of 10 MB.

Personally, I would prefer a much higher maximum but yet Blizzard SHOWS the filesize before you accept so that you know what you are getting into bandwidth-wise for those that have slower connections or much lower monthly bandwidth caps.

Also since it's possible that have various versions of a map/mod, I believe most smart mapmakers will externalize their imported files into "mod" files so that you don't have to redownload the full thing (map + imported data) 10 times for 10 different versions (so you only redownload their modified 1-2 MB map file).

In addition, odds are even with very high caps, the only things that will REALLY take a lot of space is some junkie maps with too many useless imported things AND the shiny mods that uses lots of imported data properly.

Even in WC3, few maps actually used the 4 MB limit (now 8 MB), in other words, a higher cap doesn't mean that people magically jump into pouring their maps with imported data. People will still prefer to download a map with only a 1 MB size over a 10 MB if the extra 9 MB imported data isn't justified.

On a side thing, when I really think of it, the only way that large scale mods will be able to exist over b.net is if the modder manages to convince quite a few of his pals to pool 10 or 20 MBs of their published map limits into split mod files. Note that's presuming there is no cap (either quantity or global total download limit off b.net) for mod dependencies a map/mod can have.
Last edited by Ricky_Honejasi on Mon May 24, 2010 10:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar

Lavarinth
Xel'naga Administrator
Xel'naga Administrator
Posts: 6579
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 5:21 pm
Location: His Ashworld Planet
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby Lavarinth » Mon May 24, 2010 10:22 am

Maglok wrote:I have a question: If you want to play a published map hosted by someone else, does that mean you will have to DL those max 10MB? Cause then it seems like a bit of an ok limitation to me. I do not want to have to download like 50MB just to play a multiplayer map. That can take quite a while depending on your connection.


50mb, noting it's hosted on Battle.net and no longer a peer-to-peer transfer would take a minute tops these days on an average cable connection.

But either way, I wont lie, I'm also disappointed by these limitations. Mainly publishing. The limited amount we can publish was never an aspect before, and people didn't go around posted dozens over dozens of maps on Battle.net in SC or WC3 that he/she created. There's not even a 1:1 ratio for map creator / map published, but that doesn't dignify the need for a limit. If anything, I would recommend two forms of custom map gaming: Premium content gaming, where hosting is limited and all map MB sizes are reviewed by content, and standard custom game lists where players create a game name and select from any of their maps. Consider it like WC3's melee/custom game, except both being custom games.
- - Lavarinth
Campaign Creations Administrator

User avatar

Master Jademus Sreg
Terran Battlecruiser Janitor
Terran Battlecruiser Janitor
Posts: 190
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:32 am
Status: Offline

Re: StarCraft II Map Publishing - A Primer

Postby Master Jademus Sreg » Mon May 24, 2010 10:46 am

Ricky_Honejasi wrote:People will still prefer to download a map with only a 1 MB size over a 10 MB if the extra 9 MB imported data isn't justified.

It's unlikely a map will be much smaller than 2MB; the terrain texture map by itself can be several megs. Does anyone else find that as funny as I do?
No more humans, please.


Return to “StarCraft II Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests