Have We Lost Sight?

[SuperxAndrew]

This is going to be a fairly short topic… it might end up being longer. But today I am going to talk about how we (mostly as builders, but it is evident in the whole community) have lost sight as to what a Survival Games map is supposed to be like.


Over the past 2 years of map additions one thing has been clear, the ‘acceptable’ maps have changed. It started out very adventure/survival based with SG1 and SG2. But these days it is much more fast paced and pvp based. There is nothing wrong with the new way the game is played; however, there is something wrong (in my opinion) with the way the new maps are being created.


I want to preface this by saying that I am guilty of this with Zone 85. A map can be built for quick/fast paced games or it can be build for slow/adventurous games (outdated version). I believe a map can be (SHOULD BE) built to accommodate adventurous and fast paced style-using themes that would only be seen in the books/movies. After all, that is what the game type is trying to mirror.


Today, and I will use Zone 85 as an example because I see no harm in bad mouthing my own map, we see so many maps being accepted that would never be seen in the books/movies. For instance, on Zone 85 there are helicopters and planes everywhere in the air and it isn’t run down or destroyed anywhere. A basic Hunger Games map should be isolated. Not the new style where the town is nice and pretty and there are people waving to you on the streets as you battle your fellow tributes. (Obviously, this would be an exaggeration, but surely you get my point.)


We have lost sight as to what a Hunger Games map should look like, and, as always, change is never a bad thing, but I fear that this is going beyond changing how things are played and shifting into changing the point of the game to something totally different than what Team Vareide intended when they created the game type 2 and half years ago. And it all starts in the map community.


Anyway, tell me what you think about all this. If there are any questions about things I may not have been completely clear on feel free to ask.

 

[KingofGrapes]

Totally agree, some maps these days just do not go with the flow of a hunger games original map, for example mortal skies (not hating just an example) what will come next we will not know, but I hope someone comes up with something extraordinary.

 

[Joel/MadDawg]

I don't think a survival games map has to fit into any mold. Various map creators take inspiration from various things, like how Vareide took inspiration from the Hunger Games books/movies when making his first map. In no way do I think every map has to be based off of the Hunger Games. How boring would it be if every map was a huge open forest? I personally wouldn't enjoy it. The diversity of maps is what makes mcsg fun, so I think saying that all maps should be based off of one thing is counter-intuitive.

Another point: just like sg1, survival games plugins were inspired by the Hunger Games trilogy. But like I said, just because the plugin was based off of the Hunger Games doesn't mean what functions under the plugin has to.

 

[SuperxAndrew]

I don't think a survival games map has to fit into any mold. Various map creators take inspiration from various things, like how Vareide took inspiration from the Hunger Games books/movies when making his first map. In no way do I think every map has to be based off of the Hunger Games. How boring would it be if every map was a huge open forest? I personally wouldn't enjoy it. The diversity of maps is what makes mcsg fun, so I think saying that all maps should be based off of one thing is counter-intuitive.

Another point: just like sg1, survival games plugins were inspired by the Hunger Games trilogy. But like I said, just because the plugin was based off of the Hunger Games doesn't mean what functions under the plugin has to.

I;m not saying every map has to be a huge open forest, but I do not think maps should be "active". (planes in the sky, cars on the roads, buildings/city infrastructure be fully intact)

 

[Sanders]

I must say that I agree with most that you said. Survival Games has changed. The Survival games are more centered around PvP these days then it was back in 2012 (centered around exploration/adventure). But the community around MCSG has changed aswell. Most people like PvP based maps more than the adventure/exploration type of maps. This is why most maps that are being made are centered around PvP. As most of you guys know I have made a map, Rebellion's District, which is obviously centered around adventure/exploration. I wanted to get the feeling back I got back in the very beginning of MCSG ( I wasn't on the forums back then). Because that is what had first drawn me to Survival games. Survival games now isn't bad, but it changed.

 

[meblubs23]

I love building (not necessarily mcsg maps) lots of weird things like dragons with hammer tails and 6 wings (you get the point). I see a map by the way it was built not just for the pvp but for the other fun, adventuring around. what really gets me is the terraforming in most maps. Superx i loved zone 85 right from the beginning and all of your other maps purely from your buildings.

 

[benji_r]

Yeah, I agree, I use SG 4 as an example as if you actually look at the map there is a lot of huge open area, with not very much change in terrain. So why do people like it so much? It's because the games on it are short and fun, and you don't spend half the time seeking out other tributes. No, you spend your game seeing people when all you want is a break to sort your inventory. Maps such as Vida Cova weren't accepted so much by the playing community as even though it had some outstanding terraforming it ended up with long drawn out games that you spend most of your time searching through the often repetitive terrain. That's why, if you saw a map like SG4 appear on the forums these days, I'm not saying it would be scoffed at but some people might look at it and think "yeah, looks a bit flat". Because I know I do when I see SG4. But that doesn't stop me from loving it. I guess what I'm trying to say is that even though maps are still built in the exact same way, standards have risen so much to get a map accepted to MCSG. As you may know, I also recently built a map (Highfield Estate) and my aim was to focus on keeping the games to this short, sharp concept, but still moving the terrain enough, as well as having some half decent builds in there. So to sum it all up (and really relate to your point) I think that I'd agree with you on some aspects, that maps shouldn't look like there are still people living there as the "Hunger Games" are going on, but I think if every map that had some sort of building on it just made it look destroyed, then it would get kinda repetitive. I don't feel that the "activity" on the map is really the issue, TBH I really like Zone 85 because you feel like there are things happening around you, and I don't think maps should be judged by whether they look isolated or not, as in the end, really it's only about the game play that it has been made for. I hope this isin't to difficult to understand, because if it is then tell me.

 

[RC_4777]

I do think you make a good point. The maps today don't really seem aligned withy the original vision and way to play the Survival Games gamemode. And I know from experience that it's hard nowadays to make a map that keeps the original ideals of exploration and survival that is well-received by the community. Vida Cova tried to bring back a feel of exploring, tense anticipation, and being thrown into the wilderness and having to survive, and it just wasn't popular enough to stay on the 24 player servers. Even if map makers tried to keep with these themes, it would be difficult to get enough support to make these kinds of maps popular again.

The way people like to play the game has definitely been changed, and I must admit that the way I like to play is that new way. I think the problem is that the fun of exploring wears off faster than the fun of action. Exploring a new map can be really fun, but how many times can you explore a large map before it starts to get drawn out and boring? Maps would need to cycle faster to make a game based on survival and exploration fun. Overall, the game has changed, likely permanently, although it's not necessarily a bad thing.

Another thing worth mention is people's want for "PvP areas" in the map. If you make a map with a lack of flat ground, you are likely to be met with this request. I feel like people aren't willing to think about PvP in a different way other than flat, lateral combat. But what about vertical strategy? Ambush tactics in busy, uneven areas? Once again using Vida Cova as an example, there wasn't a ton of flat ground to fight conventionally. But I always thought that that was kinda the point. Vines on the sides made vertical strategy an option, and corn had unique combat with water and a second level. If I remember correctly people didn't like that the map didn't have good PvP; to be more correct, it didn't have the PvP they were used to. I quite enjoyed fighting in unconventional areas, but others didn't.

 

[SuperxAndrew]

Sanders2408 RC_4777 benji_r
I have to agree with everything the three of you said. My point was, and now I realize I may have been vague on this, that a map (SG4 for example) could have been made EXACTLY the same, but with a more abandoned feel. I just feel that the game type struggles from the fact that it is not really Hunger Games. Because there is a way to make good pvp + Hunger Games feel (SG2!!!, imo).

 

[xxSPUxx]

As long as the maps don't look like nexus maps im fine with them.... Ew....nexus.....

 

[SuperxAndrew]

As long as the maps don't look like nexus maps im fine with them.... Ew....nexus.....

lol

 

[Bunns]

As long as the maps don't look like nexus maps im fine with them.... Ew....nexus.....

Baba