Mapping Contest Discussion Thread - November

Postby Yekyaa » Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:08 pm

Maybe I'm thinking along the lines of advanced 16...
If there isn't a box dropper for redistribution, maybe you should
just be REALLY careful. On the other hand, that stage REALLY
got on my nerves when it required me to do some intricate jumps
with tosses that didn't always make the mark... I reloaded that stage
SOOOO much. Luckily it was really small though so it was quick.

Definitely voting for auto-save reversion on this one... Now, how to do
that in my map so I can check for things and then if it screws up like a trigger
that will (instead of spawning a cube) restart the last autosave... without
autosaving.
User avatar
Yekyaa
Superior Participant
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Oct 14, 2007

Postby youme » Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:10 pm

Korjagun wrote:
In other words, it's possible to both have our cake and eat it, too--that is, assuming it's not a lie in the first place.


your apple is a lie
Fancy making a payload map?
Image
User avatar
youme
GLaDOS Module
 
Posts: 912
Joined: Oct 18, 2007
Location: Suffolk, Uk

Postby taco » Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:10 pm

Korjagun wrote:
On the other hand, Portal players are used to being given a new cube if we lose our first one, so respawning it isn't a problem. In other words, it's possible to both have our cake and eat it, too--that is, assuming it's not a lie in the first place.


Not WCC's though - if you are going to use replaceable cubes, use storage cubes.

It is a COMPANION cube and it should accompany you thought the ENTIRE level.
User avatar
taco
Loves Cake
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Oct 30, 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada.

Postby espen180 » Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:12 pm

I prefer the autoload solution, but I'd also prefer GLaDOS informed me of my failure first, so I wouldn't think "What just happened?" afterwards.
http://www.dpgames.co.uk/

Sanity is not statistical.
User avatar
espen180
Loves Cake
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Oct 15, 2007

Postby youme » Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:17 pm

espen180 wrote:
I prefer the autoload solution, but I'd also prefer GLaDOS informed me of my failure first, so I wouldn't think "What just happened?" afterwards.


That sounds like a reasonable solution. when I said that the map should provide players with the equipment needed I was including things like this too.

what I was trying to say is you should never have to suicide to continue.
Fancy making a payload map?
Image
User avatar
youme
GLaDOS Module
 
Posts: 912
Joined: Oct 18, 2007
Location: Suffolk, Uk

Postby msleeper » Sun Nov 11, 2007 4:24 am

I more or less agree with what taco said. Me and espen and Mapster could lawyer it up and write a whole paragraph on what is and is not allowed, but I really would like the rules to be as minimalistic as possible, so that we're not forcing people to create basically the same identical level.

As taco said, the spirit of the challenge is to create a bond between you and your CC, and not look at it as just another dispensable cube that you can trial-and-error by accidently (or purposly) throwing into a fizzler or some poison water. I really don't want to have to lay down the law about exactly what is and is not allowed; we're all smart here, and when you read the title Companion Cube Challenge and read the rules about being forced to use it, you know the direction the map should go in and whether or not something breaks the mold about what defines a CC map.

All of that said... No, a map should not have an area or puzzle where the player can easily or willfully destroy her CC. As I said above, I'm not trying to inhibit creativity, but I think that being able to easily destroy the CC would diminish the bond the player is supposed to feel towards her cube.

As for using a standard Weighted Cube... The short answer is yes, go ahead and use it.

If you have a great puzzle idea, and it would absolutly require the player to use more than 1 box, then sure go for it. But remember, this is a Companion Cube challenge, and when it comes time to vote, I am going to ask that people vote not only on which map was the best, but which map followed the concept of a Compaion Cube map.
Image
User avatar
msleeper
Personality Core
 
Posts: 2,107
Joined: Sep 26, 2007
Location: Atlanta, Jawjuh

Postby Yekyaa » Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:05 am

The portal stage 17 had no fizzlers or goo except for a single fizzler at
the end behind a door that ONLY opened once you "euthanized" your
companion cube. I think this kind of sets the tone in the first place.
the only case where the cube could've been lost was if you left it on top
of the steps and walked away from it, you could get back to the beginning
to get a second one, but very few people realized this.

Just a thought. ^^

Discuss. <3
User avatar
Yekyaa
Superior Participant
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Oct 14, 2007

Postby theprogram00 » Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:44 am

What I am aiming for is a map in which it's impossible to destroy your cube, however you can accidently drop it down from high ledges. All this does it force the player to foillow the cube and restart the last challenge for being careless with their cube. Currently there is no way in my map for you to get the cube stuck in any place, so thing's are looking good so far.

I think this is the best method, plus it saves on having to build a box dispenser.
“But there’s no sense crying over every mistake.
You just keep on trying till you run out of cake!”
theprogram00
Superior Participant
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Oct 26, 2007

Postby espen180 » Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:57 am

Didn't the rules state that only one cube generally could be used? Eh. :?

Your honor, I lay forth a suggestion for aforementioned paragraph.
Please take as joke if not accepted into rules. Please change if necessary.

§ 1.1 Aperture Science Weighted Companion Cube
    a. The player must not be set in conditions or surrounding that allow or tempt destruction or otherwise loss of Weighted Companion Cube.

    b. A map must have one (1) Weighted Companion Cube available at all times.

    c. A map's allotment of Weighted Companion Cubes must not surpass one (1). A map can distribute new Weighted Companion Cubes when certain conditions are met.
      i. The player has been forced to leave Weithed Companion Cube Behind.
      ii. The player has in any means lost his/hers Weighted Companion Cube
    d. The player must be forced to destroy the Weighted Companion Cube at the map end.
http://www.dpgames.co.uk/

Sanity is not statistical.
User avatar
espen180
Loves Cake
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Oct 15, 2007

Postby Hober » Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:01 pm

Because of b and c, why is a necessary? If they do (accidentally) destroy the cube, they can have another one.
User avatar
Hober
GLaDOS Module
 
Posts: 881
Joined: Oct 13, 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC

Postby espen180 » Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:15 pm

It's called a paradox.
http://www.dpgames.co.uk/

Sanity is not statistical.
User avatar
espen180
Loves Cake
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Oct 15, 2007

Postby msleeper » Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:42 pm

:lol: That's why I love my mods.
Image
User avatar
msleeper
Personality Core
 
Posts: 2,107
Joined: Sep 26, 2007
Location: Atlanta, Jawjuh

Postby Shmitz » Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:25 pm

The problem one would face with having both a WCC and a WSC is the mapper would have to be extremely careful to ensure that the player could not leave the Companion Cube behind and instead take the Storage Cube to the next puzzle. It could be done in theory, but it'd probably be harder than it's worth.
User avatar
Shmitz
Test Supervisor
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Oct 18, 2007

Postby Artesia » Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:39 pm

not really hard... make a hole in the wall where you can throw a cube through to open the door. You don't see where the cube lands. name the CC differently then the other boxes. make a trigger to open the door that only accepts the companion cube. If you throw a storage cube it, make a portal cleanser that filters the name for just the boxes, play a glados message saying "invalid weighted storage cube detected"

after you get the door open, there is a fizzler, after which you are reunited with your cube
[insert visually obtrusive graphic or witty comment here]
User avatar
Artesia
Loves Cake
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Oct 13, 2007
Location: Las Vegas NV

Postby Lorithad » Sun Nov 11, 2007 7:01 pm

Yeah, I just think having a fizzler that doesn't destroy the WCC after every chamber that has other cubes in it would work out quite well.

However, it might be confusing to some people that a fizzler allows the WCC, but doesn't allow anything else. Perhaps if a different fizzler type was introduced that looked slightly different that allows just WCC's.

I'm sure if it was made availible for public use, it would be a favorite in the WCC contest(s).
User avatar
Lorithad
Test Supervisor
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Oct 22, 2007

PreviousNext

Return to ThinkingWithPortals.com Contests

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Community Spotlight

Search the Forums

User Menu

Register
Login

Login