Multiple map endings/pathways

[Damen]

Well for some reason I thought of this last night and I am quite surprised that I actually remembered to post it up!

Well I am pretty sure the following would be possible once the SDK comes out, and I am not sure if this has been mentioned before here but I personally haven't seen it.

Lets say that the survivors start in Campaign1_1. They are going through and halfway through there is a part where there is a decision to go right of left, and yes some maps have those but they end up leading back to a main path. So they can go right or left. Let us say right continues the same campaign and leads to Campaign1_2, which going left enters Campaign2_2.

Let us say they took left and entered Campaign2_2. Half way through that map let us say they had another fork in the road. Right would lead back to Campaign1_3, or they could stay on the current campaign and go left for Campaign2_3.

Of course it won't be labeled so they won't know if they will be staying on the current campaign, and all-in-all they aren't actually switching campaigns. The path they choose IS the campaign itself.

Perhaps instead of having two campaigns intertwined there could be three, or more. Say you go one way maybe you can't get back to the first campaign but then have to choose between two different ones.


I have made a graphic to help people who may either think this is a wall of text, or just might not understand the concept.

An easy way to tie them together would to have the aesthetics of the decisions points correspond to the other campaign. Lets say one way is a boat yard, the other is a train station. Which would correspond with the parts of the other campaigns. It would be a lot of work but it would be a killer thing to do in my opinion.

http://www.damen.qupis.com/mapchoices.jpg (http://www.damen.qupis.com/mapchoices.jpg)

[shadowstreak]

Web Of Trust started yelling at me when I entered the site, not good, going to do a virus scan now.

[Waterboy2go]

Web Of Trust started yelling at me when I entered the site, not good, going to do a virus scan now.
wat

[Kisho]

While it's a good idea, it would prove useless once the map had been played enough times for people to know which paths are easier to survive through. The other possible paths would become irrelevant, and as such a waste of the designer's time.

[Damen]

While it's a good idea, it would prove useless once the map had been played enough times for people to know which paths are easier to survive through. The other possible paths would become irrelevant, and as such a waste of the designer's time.

So with your point of view designers of maps should only make one little pathway because only the easiest one will get chosen anyways?

As far as I know in the official maps there are ways that people take that aren't always the easiest way. In custom made maps you don't usually just run through it to beat it. It is more of an explore factor.

[shadowstreak]

wat
If you have firefox you can download a plugin that accesses a database that has scanned countless websites and shows if it is a dangerous site. And that site was in the deep red, like my computers life was in danger.

[Waterboy2go]

If you have firefox you can download a plugin that accesses a database that has scanned countless websites and shows if it is a dangerous site. And that site was in the deep red, like my computers life was in danger.

I have that plugin, and it shows green, I also have siteadvisor showing green also, I think you have a problem on your end.

[shadowstreak]

well clicking on that picture did it.

[Damen]

well clicking on that picture did it.

It is hosted by a free host. So it could be true.

OT please.

[cheeserinoo1]

go in game and listen to commentary. they talk about this.

[Platypus]

So with your point of view designers of maps should only make one little pathway because only the easiest one will get chosen anyways?

Valve actually did this. Their plan was to make a huge city with 4 or 5 routes, but they found out that after a few play-throughs people would choose one path and always stick to it, there for becoming
a waste of the designer's time.

This is why the official l4d maps as we know them are fairly linear in nature, with a few side paths or back tracks that give a chance for health or weapons.

[Damen]

This is why the official l4d maps as we know them are fairly linear in nature, with a few side paths or back tracks that give a chance for health or weapons.

I know they talk about it in the commentary.

However just because Valve didn't follow through with it doesn't mean it would be a failure. It would be the designers battle to make sure one side has its hard parts as does the other.

Just because Valve failed at this doesn't mean a community member will.

[Kisho]

So with your point of view designers of maps should only make one little pathway because only the easiest one will get chosen anyways?

As far as I know in the official maps there are ways that people take that aren't always the easiest way. In custom made maps you don't usually just run through it to beat it. It is more of an explore factor.

Yeah, turns out different paths in maps are a different matter entirely than different maps. A different path in l4d doesn't make a huge difference because of the director spawning stuff randomly. If given the choice in a campaign between a map with lots of underground or inside areas, and a map with lots of tall buildings and open areas, noone's going to choose the latter. Not once they've played the campaign a few times through to see what their options are.

However just because Valve didn't follow through with it doesn't mean it would be a failure. It would be the designers battle to make sure one side has its hard parts as does the other.

Sorry, but unless all paths are almost identical in design to each other, one's going to prove easier to survive through than the other, and as the point of this game is to get from A to B as quickly as possible while trying not to die, people aren't really likely to waste time running around exploring when they don't need to. That's what they did when testing the open maps, and that's what they do in game as it stands.

[Dead Fish]

The two campaigns don't necessarily have to be balanced in terms of difficulty. As others said, players would choose one way and stick with it. They just have to be as diverse as possible.

At that point it becomes a matter of taste and not strategy. Not everybody wants to play the same thing over and over again if both campaigns are interesting enough.

[Stakhanov]

Sounds good for coop only campaigns. You don't even have to let the players choose - have random doors / passages that lead survivors to different maps.
I don't know if it's possible to make survivors spawn in different safe rooms depending on the map they come from , but it would be pretty awesome.
So you could have an overall longer 4rth map that drops you closer to the finale (useful for expert runs) or possibly start with pills and pipebombs , ect.

[Tyr]

It would be cool if it was done kind of like that TF2 map, (can't remember the name,) where different parts come avaliable to you on each round even though the layout is essentially the same.

[DangerWillRobinson]

As far as I know in the official maps there are ways that people take that aren't always the easiest way. In custom made maps you don't usually just run through it to beat it. It is more of an explore factor.



There's a few long routes in L4D, that I've only taken/seen taken, about 3 times. Nobody's gonna take the long way after it loses it's glam.

[darkmessiah]

Thinking of multiple of endings, I think that parallel server mapping would be TOTALLY awesome:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3447/3396814388_15ed5ef42f.jpg?v=0

2 Teams fighting it out with or without each other, even ending with who had the highest score of zombie kills.

This won't happen, but oh well, it would be crazy cool if it did.

[Keptron]

This won't happen, but oh well, it would be crazy cool if it did.
Valve is kind of lazy for such things, it's a miracle to L4D be out.

[Stuffinator]

well clicking on that picture did it.
Jpg's can't be viruses!

@topic
I think it's a sweet idea, but I agree with Kisho, that was my first thought too, that after a few weeks/months some parts won't be used I think!

But hey, as soon as the sdk come's out you can have a try :D

[Damen]

At that point it becomes a matter of taste and not strategy. Not everybody wants to play the same thing over and over again if both campaigns are interesting enough.

I think Fish says it very nicely here. I was trying to get across the same message but I think you did it better.

The point of SDK and custom made maps is all about getting more variety and NOT doing the same thing over and over again just because it seems to work best.

[descender]

this is a great idea, my suggestion would be to have certain path's randomly blocked off by the AI-D, and have it set up where you didnt' know which way was open til you were almost to the end of that path. would make the game much more intense for the survivors, which is severely lacking due to playing VS on normal.

[Darkness]

While it's a good idea, it would prove useless once the map had been played enough times for people to know which paths are easier to survive through. The other possible paths would become irrelevant, and as such a waste of the designer's time.


Not necessarily. You could reward a harder path with a higher probability of finding items. So a team looking for a better score would choose the harder path. When my team plays, we usually explore every nook and cranny for health packs, does this take longer and risk more attacks? yes. But the rewards are > then the costs.

Furthermore, if you had multiple paths, a team wouldnt know where the guns are if they took the easy path. So a team that takes a harder path would be rewarded with t2 guns where as a team that tries to take it easy gets stuck with their t1s.

[OrangeCat X]

You know...

I saw an ad for a FPS, forget the name, but the idea was that one side would pick their third of the map as "home"[A], the other side would do likewise [B], and the computer would pick the middle [X]. Then the battle would start under these parameters.

[A]
[X]
[B]

Could this work at random with L4D in an urban environment scenario? I mean. Could the comp pick a random start map, a block in between, and then a "end" map at the end?

[A][K][Z], [A][E][Y], [B][K][Y] etc?
...a team that takes a harder path would be rewarded with t2 guns where as a team that tries to take it easy gets stuck with their t1s.I like how you think. ^.^

[Damen]

Not necessarily. You could reward a harder path with a higher probability of finding items. So a team looking for a better score would choose the harder path. When my team plays, we usually explore every nook and cranny for health packs, does this take longer and risk more attacks? yes. But the rewards are > then the costs.

Glad to see that not all people think the easiest way = win.

:)I saw an ad for a FPS, forget the name, but the idea was that one side would pick their third of the map as "home"[A], the other side would do likewise [B], and the computer would pick the middle [X]. Then the battle would start under these parameters.

As confusing as that post is, I think I get the jist of it. I simply can't wait for the SDK and some really inventive mods to come out. The sky is the limit.

[OrangeCat X]

As confusing as that post is, I think I get the jist of it. I simply can't wait for the SDK and some really inventive mods to come out. The sky is the limit.Yeah, it is confusing. I don't think they got it to work.

Better example, one side may take "dug in trenches" the other side may take "small town w/ sniping towers" and the comp decides to put "river w/ bridge" between the two making one big map.

Or both sides may take "dug in trenches" and the comp puts "small refinery" between the two, etc...

[Damen]

Ahh so there are a big pot of small maps. The whole campaign would be a combination of maps chosen by the players/computer.

I get it now! haha.

[sagesource]

my suggestion would be to have certain path's randomly blocked off by the AI-D, and have it set up where you didnt' know which way was open til you were almost to the end of that path.

Rather what I and my friends are doing in our campaign. We have the Director triggering several logic_case that do such things as lock and unlock doors, remove or activate barriers (through toggling the Do Not Render flag), turn lights on or off, or perhaps even change, move, or remove whole buildings (though this might cause major problems with the navmesh; still working on it). The result is that when you start up the map, you never know which of thousands of possible combinations of paths and resources you are going to face. A street that is clear one time will be blocked with a crashed bus the next time, forcing the survivors into a building to get past. A canal that used to be exited through climbing up a wrecked car may have its exit blocked (look before you leap, guys) and a service tunnel under it may have opened up. The design challenge, of course, is making sure that there is always at least one viable path through the obstacles, that it is not too frustrating to find that path (in the case of that canal, a quick glance out of a window at the beginning will do it), and that the difficulty is roughly the same in different iterations. I think that's why Valve didn't try this -- the fear of having a reviewer or two getting whacked by an unlucky hard configuration and then whining all over the intertubes. It certainly don't produce stereotypically "fair" maps. Some runs are fairly routine; some are beastly hard. But that's life....

[Damen]

Rather what I and my friends are doing in our campaign. We have the Director triggering several logic_case that do such things as lock and unlock doors, remove or activate barriers (through toggling the Do Not Render flag), turn lights on or off, or perhaps even change, move, or remove whole buildings (though this might cause major problems with the navmesh; still working on it). The result is that when you start up the map, you never know which of thousands of possible combinations of paths and resources you are going to face. A street that is clear one time will be blocked with a crashed bus the next time, forcing the survivors into a building to get past. A canal that used to be exited through climbing up a wrecked car may have its exit blocked (look before you leap, guys) and a service tunnel under it may have opened up. The design challenge, of course, is making sure that there is always at least one viable path through the obstacles, that it is not too frustrating to find that path (in the case of that canal, a quick glance out of a window at the beginning will do it), and that the difficulty is roughly the same in different iterations. I think that's why Valve didn't try this -- the fear of having a reviewer or two getting whacked by an unlucky hard configuration and then whining all over the intertubes. It certainly don't produce stereotypically "fair" maps. Some runs are fairly routine; some are beastly hard. But that's life....

Hopefully SDK will make things easier for you guys. Sounds like a great idea though!

[awdrgy123]

good ideas are good :)

[CorporalAris]

There is a guy on L4dmods.com that has a random number fire each time the map is loaded, and it picks a specific pathway, but different, each time you play the map. No choice is involved, but it makes it much harder to learn the map.

[Damen]

There is a guy on L4dmods.com that has a random number fire each time the map is loaded, and it picks a specific pathway, but different, each time you play the map. No choice is involved, but it makes it much harder to learn the map.

Well I was pretty sure my idea wasn't completely original. It isn't too hard to think of but I thought I might as well put it out there.

As long as something like this gets done I will be happy!

[Darkness]

I agree damen.

I would be perfectly happy with player choice based planning or computer choice based planning. It would keep maps fresh for longer if there was a big pot of maps or even 2 for each step has you had in your original picture. And random obstacles were spawned each time played, so it would be like a truly different scenario each time. And sometimes you would be force to play different sides of the map or force to take long ways or force to take short ways etc.

[Gurney]

I like the idea of the director choosing the paths that are open. It makes the role of the director seem even more important, rather than just an invisible guy who decides where items go.