Nordic Countries [Quenched]

[natty dread]

Large

Click image to enlarge.

Small

Click image to enlarge.

XML with updated coords

http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/2/7/2 ... dic_10.xml


ok, it's out of my hands now.

[MrBenn]

Cheers natty. I've sent the update to lackattack

[MrBenn]

Cheers natty. I've sent the update to lackattack

And the update has now gone live...

Thanks again natty

[natty dread]

I've been toying with the idea of revamping my first map...

Click image to enlarge.

[natty dread]

A bit of improvement...

So, should I go through with this? Anyone think this map could use a bit of touch-up?

Click image to enlarge.

[DiM]

seeing how so very few people play the map i'd say don't bother wasting your time with it. do something new.
on the other hand improving the graphics might help the map.
it's really up to you but i'd go for a new map.

[danryan]

Funny, I really like this map as it is actually. I'd recommend leaving it as is - I think it was a very solid effort.

[natty dread]

seeing how so very few people play the map

Are you kidding me? This is the most popular map I've made.

Besides, better graphics could get more people to play it.

I'd recommend leaving it as is - I think it was a very solid effort.

Oh come on, it's my first map and it's fugly. I made it with paint.net which is just one step up from ms paint.

Besides, I already got my creative juices flowing.

Actually, I'll just post this in it's own thread, to get it some notice.

[natty dread]

Files for upload:

XML: http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/2/7/2 ... ordic1.xml
Large: http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/1918/nordic10.png
Small: http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/8246/nordic10s.png



[Mod Edit : Graphics Revamp. ONLY graphics suggestions will be taken in consideration]

Original map thread --> viewtopic.php?f=358&t=101345

Nordic was my first map, and looking back now, I wish I had worked on it longer. I was a new mapmaker then... By (my) today's standards, the map looks ugly, and I want to give my #1 map the makeover it deserves.

Here's what I have so far...

XML:

http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/2/7/2 ... ordic1.xml

show: test results

Latest images

Click image to enlarge.

Click image to enlarge.

show: Olders...

[DiM]

seeing how so very few people play the map

Are you kidding me? This is the most popular map I've made.

not kidding at all. the map simply isn't played by a lot of people.
it has just 5379 games in 450 days. that's less than what classic gets in a week.

Besides, better graphics could get more people to play it.

i'm 99% sure it won't. at least not in the long run. all revamps so far have caused a temporary spike in the games created immediately after the revamp is done. but soon enough everybody realises it's just the same old map with prettier graphics and the number of games returns to normal.
basically if a map has great gameplay it will be played regardless of graphics. your map has a simple classic gameplay that doesn't make it stand out in a crowd. it's not big to fit long 8 player games, it's not small like doodle for people to play russian roullette on it. it's of average size and any normal gameplay map of average size competes with classic. and obviously loses... badly.

so i'd rather see you work on something new, something better, something different than a revamp.

[DiM]

since the discussion moved i'm also posting here:

seeing how so very few people play the map

Are you kidding me? This is the most popular map I've made.

not kidding at all. the map simply isn't played by a lot of people.
it has just 5379 games in 450 days. that's less than what classic gets in a week.

Besides, better graphics could get more people to play it.

i'm 99% sure it won't. at least not in the long run. all revamps so far have caused a temporary spike in the games created immediately after the revamp is done. but soon enough everybody realises it's just the same old map with prettier graphics and the number of games returns to normal.
basically if a map has great gameplay it will be played regardless of graphics. your map has a simple classic gameplay that doesn't make it stand out in a crowd. it's not big to fit long 8 player games, it's not small like doodle for people to play russian roullette on it. it's of average size and any normal gameplay map of average size competes with classic. and obviously loses... badly.

so i'd rather see you work on something new, something better, something different than a revamp.

[natty dread]

Comparing maps to classic? Come on. There's no map on this site that comes even close to getting the play Classic gets. So what, should we just stop making maps alltogether?

Besides, if you compare Nordic Countries with Op. Drug war - if you look at Coleman's sample of games played, Nordic was getting 3 times as many games created as Drug war, yet you had no problem with Drug war's revamp.

Anyway, I don't get why you're so against this. Weren't you the one who was complaining of low quality of CC maps? I'm improving a map that quite frankly has terrible graphics. It will raise the overall quality of CC maps, even if only very slightly. What is wrong with that?

[DiM]

Comparing maps to classic? Come on. There's no map on this site that comes even close to getting the play Classic gets. So what, should we just stop making maps alltogether?

i always try to compare to the best. it's the only way to improve.

Besides, if you compare Nordic Countries with Op. Drug war - if you look at Coleman's sample of games played, Nordic was getting 3 times as many games created as Drug war, yet you had no problem with Drug war's revamp.

"i'd rather see you use your talent to make a brand new map." these are the exact words i said to telvannia when he said he wants to do the revamp. and this is pretty similar to what i told you.

Anyway, I don't get why you're so against this.

i'm not against this revamp in particular but against all revamps. if a map doesn't have huge visibility issues that impair gameplay or absolutely horrible graphics then it should not be revamped. i consider it to be a waste of time. no map is going to suddenly come to life and become a blockbuster after a revamp. look at all the revamps done so far if you don't believe me.

Weren't you the one who was complaining of low quality of CC maps? I'm improving a map that quite frankly has terrible graphics. It will raise the overall quality of CC maps, even if only very slightly. What is wrong with that?

i wasn't complaining just about the quality of graphics but also about gameplay. the most played maps are still those made 3-4 years ago and it's not just the graphics that makes them the most played. it's also the gameplay. in fact i'm sure most of the map makers with appearances in the top 10 have improved their skills in the last few years and judging by their new standards the old maps look rather bad. and yet their maps are as successful now as they were 3-4 years ago. if a map has good gameplay then the graphics can be simply decent to make that map a hit. of course stunning gfx wouldn't hurt. but even with stunning graphics a map with poor gameplay will still be a poor performer.
basically in the last 2 years maps have not only become uglier but they have also started to have less appealing gameplay.
this map in particular falls into a very difficult category of classic gameplay average sized maps. not only this category has a lot of maps but it is also the category of classic. it would take something absolutely brilliant for a map to become the best in this category and defeat classic. i'm not even sure it can be done, but i've learned never to say never.
so instead of wasting time with this map try something different, create a map that brings something new to this site. the key to success is innovation.

[AndyDufresne]

basically in the last 2 years maps have not only become uglier but they have also started to have less appealing gameplay.
this map in particular falls into a very difficult category of classic gameplay average sized maps. not only this category has a lot of maps but it is also the category of classic. it would take something absolutely brilliant for a map to become the best in this category and defeat classic. i'm not even sure it can be done, but i've learned never to say never.
so instead of wasting time with this map try something different, create a map that brings something new to this site. the key to success is innovation.

I think you are missing a lot of good maps, and are speaking a little naively.

show: Maps since January 2010

There are a fair number of popular maps in that list.


--Andy

[Coleman]

Ahem.

While there may be truth to what DiM is saying it's a bit more harsh than I am willing to be.

That said, clearly you own your own time and have quite a few maps already in the process. Any map maker can revamp their own map anytime they want to. It really irks me that lack can profit by selling a map I made on a shirt without my seeing any of it but honestly I doubt anyone is buying those shirts anyway so I haven't attempted to formally protest it. Anyway, for the most part, I believe if a map maker wanted their map removed from the site they could make it happen.

More on topic, if you didn't have any maps already undergoing development and wanted to spend all your time on this I might completely share DiM's objections but I'm not going to flat out say you shouldn't be doing it. I just don't believe that.

With all that out of the way I'm going to be soul crushing in a different way and say I don't see how this is any improvement over the original map, but you should take that with a grain of salt as I have no skill or knowledge of art to back that up.

[DiM]

I think you are missing a lot of good maps, and are speaking a little naively.

show: Maps since January 2010

There are a fair number of popular maps in that list.


--Andy

yeah there are a few good maps there. but how many are great? how many are poor?
i didn't say that all maps made in 2010 and 2011 are crap. i just said they're less appealing than the maps made before that date. which is true. the greatest maps have been made before 2010.
excluding beta and limited edition maps and judging by average games per day we have no maps from 2010 and 2011 in top 20 and just 6 maps in top 50. so no great maps done in this period of time, but we have 6 good maps out of 34 made. we have 11 more decent maps placed from 51 to 100. the rest are in the bottom half.
that's really not such a great performance.

[natty dread]

Ok Dim, Andy & rest, please take the discussion about 2010 maps to another thread, this is a map thread after all.

About this revamp: Dim, I get what you're saying, but honestly, this revamp is something I want to do. Nordic Countries, the map, means a lot to me, firstly because I happen to live there and secondly because it's my first map. It's a map that in my mind deserves better treatment than what I gave it when I was still a foundry noob and made graphics with paint.

Also, I enjoy doing graphics. It's something I do because I like it. When I start a new project, I don't think if it's a waste of time or if I could spend my efforts on something better - or to put it in other words, even if this revamp does nothing to the popularity of NC, even if it doesn't benefit anything, it doesn't matter to me, because I enjoy the graphics work. It's what I do.

Now, here's an update, still some things missing (texts on the minimap, mostly, and impassables) but almost everything is there:

Click image to enlarge.

Now, would anyone care to give opinion about the graphics?

[natty dread]

Ok all stuff done, comments plox.

Click image to enlarge.

[RjBeals]

the ocean looks nice, but that texture pattern over land looks bad

[natty dread]

If someone doesn't think this looks better than the currently playable map... then I don't know what to say, they should get new eyes I guess...

[natty dread]

the ocean looks nice, but that texture pattern over land looks bad

Please take a look at the newer version in the drafting room...

[koontz1973]

natty, I am not going to say it looks better or worse, just new and maybe improved but I will wait till you are nearer the finish to say that. A few small points though for now.

The mountains do look better, the trees (green things) worse. Why, because the mountains look like mountains and the green blobs look like blobs. I would think that a forest would have a more uniform colour all over and not a dark edge with a light middle.
The bridge is a cross over from Yugoslavia map, am I correct and if so, how about something new.
In the old map, the shields carried army numbers, I take it this would be the same and if so, certain numbers and colours may not show to well + you have drawn these great shields which will have army numbers on them.
Lastly, the texture looks bloody awful (that is not a professional opinion but a personal one), but it is your map and if you want it then fine with me.

Good luck with the revamp.

[natty dread]

The bridges are new.

Textures... I kinda like the texture, myself. But I'm not opposed to trying other alternatives.

Forests... Idk. I'll tweak them somewhat.

Can we move this on to main foundry?

[Gillipig]

Nordic was my first map, and looking back now, I wish I had worked on it longer. I was a new mapmaker then... By today's standards, the map looks ugly, and I want to give my #1 map the makeover it deserves.

Here's what I have so far:

Click image to enlarge.

Olds...
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2875/nordic02.jpg
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5842/nordic01.jpg

I don't think it's ugly but it's not as visually stunning as this update! Beautiful colors and a varm outlook! Except for Norrland and the Glacier which stings in the eyes a bit! Love what you've done with the capitals !!!

[natty dread]

Ok, I'm trying a different texture

Click image to enlarge.