Why do you hate some Wc3 Resources?

[neo_sluf]

So i want to ask some answers from the TERRAIN EXPERS and other experts their...

Why do you hate BLIZZARD CLIFFS?

Or why it is that BLIZZARD TREES is not recommended to use in RPG?

Is the BLIZZARD ENTERTAINMENT will be angry because you hate those that they have made?

Why do the BLIZZARD ENTERTAINMENT create a BLIZZARD CLIFF..if it just ugly?(AS HELL..xD..some says)

Don't hate me...i just want to know the truth..

 

[sonofjay]

Why do you hate BLIZZARD CLIFFS?

It always depends on how you use it, most of the times I use blizzard cliffs for my melee maps since this is the most effective way of making the path etc etc. Its just the matter of how creative you are and how effective you can use it.

Or why it is that BLIZZARD TREES is not recommended to use in RPG?

Blizzard's trees are just ugly, the only exception is the village(fall) trees.

BLIZZARD CLIFF..if it just ugly?

Blizzard cliff is effective as hell, people just don't know how to use it properly so its like this.

Someone use blizzard cliff -> he use it badly -> the terrain becomes shit -> many people saw the map -> everyone now start to think that blizzard cliff is ugly which is not.

 

[Maker]

I think that wiht the apply height tool, you can make better looking, more natural cliffs and hills than with apply cliff tool.

The same goes for the trees, they look slightly cartoony and there are more realistic tree models available.

 

[rulerofiron99]

Blizzard cliffs are terrible for neat pathing and projectile systems. They also make flying units go mad (read: fly higher than normal).

I've never understood why people use the "but blizzard trees look so cartoony we want realistic" argument, warcraft 3 is not a realistic game, and it does not have a realistic art style. Custom trees only look good if you change all the models and textures in your game to fit it.

Lords Summer trees are perfect, imo.

 

[Celaquil]

It's all a matter of what kind of map, or thing, you're making.

Now "Terrainers" dislike anything that doesn't look good, if they're good terrainers themselves, so it's only natural that most of us doesn't like Blizzard trees and Blizzard cliffs.
Now, what concerns the cliffs is that they look ugly no matter what, period. And I'd like to see you prove that wrong, Mr. Sonofjay. However, what concerns Blizzard trees
is another matter.

Of course, if you're making a Terrain Art and have the camera angle looking at the trees from the side then the Blizzard trees will look stocky, ugly and bloody yes I'll use
"unrealistic" here. Though some maps, if done correctly, and if they're following the same style as Wc3's general look, may be fitting for some Blizzard tree mayhem.
- The same might concern blizzard cliffs, however unlikely that is.

Thank you, EXTERMINATE.

 

[sonofjay]

And I'd like to see you prove that wrong, Mr. Sonofjay.

Melee Map

We're talking on different point of views, you as a terrain artist and me as a mapper

 

[eubz]

I don't hate anything blizzard created. I only mod the models to create a new ones.

 

[Deleted member 212788]

As stated above, it all depends on what style and atmosphere you are going for. The map genre only plays a small part in this. For instance, most melee maps use blizzard cliffs as it is the best way to create certain pathing but, if you are making a gloomy RPG, you'd probably be better off using more High Res resources. And, to the last of your questions, blizzard wouldn't have added the import manager if they didn't want the community to improve the look of the game and secondly, don't forget that the game is over 10 years old. Back then, these cliffs/trees were a lot more popular in maps.

 

[Celaquil]

We're talking on different point of views, you as a terrain artist and me as a mapper

It's not like I will download that thing to look at some cliffs, either screenshots or nothing.

Oh and also, far as I know this is the "Terrain Board" and he's talking to "Terrainers," not "mappers."

 

[Deleted member 212788]

It's not like I will download that thing to look at some cliffs, either screenshots or nothing.

Oh and also, far as I know this is the "Terrain Board" and he's talking to "Terrainers," not "mappers."

Let's not forget that terraining has 2 sides. Artistic terraining and Playable terraining. Both are equally important.

 

[takakenji]

i somehow doubt blizzard would be mad we dont like their cliffs

 

[marko9]

Why the hell are you arguing about this anyway... Sonofjay, of course you will use Blizzard Cliffs and Trees to make melee maps, not that you have to but that is just what anyone would do right? If you changed the trees you would than have to change all the other aspects of the map in order to have the same quality, to make the models fit each other.

On the other side its not just the trees and the cliffs that are ''ugly'' comparing to the new models created here or on any other modding site out there, which is rather normal since WC3 is a pretty old game at the time...

The thing is I can return and play the game now and I will still be enjoying the game just as I did the first time, if not for the models and textures than for the awesome story and gameplay that I really enjoy every time I play

Chill out! -_-

 

[sonofjay]

Well there was supposed to be some screenshots there.

Because i'm pretty sure he is asking here to improve the terrain on his map where he used blizzard cliff and blizz default models this was first posted on the site discussion a moderator throw it here on the terrain board.

Oh well, I throw my thoughts you throw yours, you want yours to be taken instead of mine, then fine as if I care who he believes.

 

[Celaquil]

Let's not forget that terraining has 2 sides. Artistic terraining and Playable terraining. Both are equally important.

It does? Well, I reckon I can to some degree acknowledge the existence of these "Playable Terrainers" under a different name; Mappers.
- Or map-making terrainers.

Then again, personally, and this is a strictly personal point of view. I'd say Artistic terraining outmatches "playable terraining" based on two facts
(and one preference), Warcraft 3 is a ten and a half years old game, that most certainly should have been dead by now.
- Art never dies.

Why the hell are you arguing about this anyway...

The only trouble-maker what concerns a decent argumentation is a trouble-spotter.
- Don't make a raving mad bull out of a pony.

then fine as if I care who he believes.

Yes.

 

[Deleted member 212788]

It does? Well, I reckon I can to some degree acknowledge the existence of these "Playable Terrainers" under a different name; Mappers.

Then again, personally, and this is strictly personal. I'd say Artistic terraining outmatches "playable terraining" based on two facts
(and one preference), Warcraft 3 is a ten and a half years old game, that most certainly should have been dead by now.
- Art never dies.

That is only half correct. The other reason Wc3 still lives is the fact that it is among, if not, the best fantasy map editor around. Yes, there are other editors but if you take a closer look at the majority of them, they have too many damn limitations that just ruin the mapping experience. This is one of the reasons I respect blizzard - they never try to force the community into something but rather than that let them create their own map genres.

 

[Malefic]

Waaa..
Blizzard clifs are not ugly , mapmakers make them ugly because they don't use them in the right way !

 

[marko9]

Waaa..
Blizzard clifs are not ugly , mapmakers make them ugly because they don't use them in the right way !

That Is what I wanted to state with my comment

 

[Zwiebelchen]

Interesting thread.
I think the answer to some of your questions is that blizzard cliffs serve a different artistic style than custom made cliffs.

WC3 art style is 'cartoonish'. This means very bright colors and strong contrasts, simple shading with an almost cel-shading anime-style look on units.

It's not that those cliffs are ugly. In fact, you can make some pretty good terrain with them - I did that in the past (well, actually, this was 8 years ago, when I started mapping for WC3) and was pretty pleased with the results. The trick was to use cliffs in combination with terrain height modifiers and doodads.

About the blizzard trees, they serve their purpose perfectly: create a colorful, cartoonish environment which looks great from birdseye view.
Note that wc3 is an RTS; all of the models look great from above, whereas the side views are almost always not as polished, as polycount was a real issue in the days when the game was new - the ingame water is a nice example for this ... the GPU consumption is ridicolously cheap (its just one plane with an alpha texture) and it looks good from above, but not from lower angles.

With raising map quality over the years, people wanted to achieve different art styles within the game to support other game styles. This was when the Sci-fi models and highress models came up.
It's not that blizzard trees or cliffs are ugly, they just don't fit if you don't want the cartoonish style of WC3.
Note that some of the most popular maps in WC3 history embraced the cartoonish art style of WC3 and allowed for custom models that match the style to shine. DOTA is the best example here.

 

[Malefic]

Interesting thread.
I think the answer to some of your questions is that blizzard cliffs serve a different artistic style than custom made cliffs.

WC3 art style is 'cartoonish'. This means very bright colors and strong contrasts, simple shading with an almost cel-shading anime-style look on units.

It's not that those cliffs are ugly. In fact, you can make some pretty good terrain with them - I did that in the past (well, actually, this was 8 years ago, when I started mapping for WC3) and was pretty pleased with the results. The trick was to use cliffs in combination with terrain height modifiers and doodads.

About the blizzard trees, they serve their purpose perfectly: create a colorful, cartoonish environment which looks great from birdseye view.
Note that wc3 is an RTS; all of the models look great from above, whereas the side views are almost always not as polished, as polycount was a real issue in the days when the game was new - the ingame water is a nice example for this ... the GPU consumption is ridicolously cheap (its just one plane with an alpha texture) and it looks good from above, but not from lower angles.

With raising map quality over the years, people wanted to achieve different art styles within the game to support other game styles. This was when the Sci-fi models and highress models came up.
It's not that blizzard trees or cliffs are ugly, they just don't fit if you don't want the cartoonish style of WC3.
Note that some of the most popular maps in WC3 history embraced the cartoonish art style of WC3 and allowed for custom models that match the style to shine. DOTA is the best example here.

As i said blizzard cliffs need more time and work to make them cool.
Why you use DOTA as example ? They have the worst Blizzard cliff placement.
EoTA map here on hive is the best example how to use blizzard cliffs.

 

[marko9]

As i said blizzard cliffs need more time and work to make them cool.
Why you use DOTA as example ? They have the worst Blizzard cliff placement.
EoTA map here on hive is the best example how to use blizzard cliffs.

Ahh dude I think dota map is pretty good, and the cliffs are well placed as well...

 

[Malefic]

Ahh dude I think dota map is pretty good, and the cliffs are well placed as well...

Gameplay is good , placement of cliffs is also good , but tile and dodat placement is so far the worst i saw on "popular warcraft 3 maps " ! I can't play DOTA 1 because of it !
Please don't make this a DOTA thread this is hive, no bad stuff here .

 

[marko9]

I just have to say this... DOTA has to be the way it is... DOTA 2 does not differ so much, only for the Graphics, but IceFrog did an amazing job dude... that map is not even made to showcase terrain

 

[~Void~]

Is it just me or does every thread like this eventually turn into a DotA argument?

It's like that thing with Wikipedia and Hitler...

 

[neo_sluf]

Hey...pls. dont make dota an example......

 

[Zwiebelchen]

As i said blizzard cliffs need more time and work to make them cool.
Why you use DOTA as example ? They have the worst Blizzard cliff placement.
EoTA map here on hive is the best example how to use blizzard cliffs.

I never said the cliff placement and overall terrain design of DOTA was good or bad. Where did you read that?
All I said was that DOTA used and embraced the cartoonish style of WC3 and used it well. Nobody cares about DOTA not being stuffed with highress models because that's the style of the map!
It was never supposed to be ultra-realistic.

 

[marko9]

I never said the cliff placement and overall terrain design of DOTA was good or bad. Where did you read that?
All I said was that DOTA used and embraced the cartoonish style of WC3 and used it well. Nobody cares about DOTA not being stuffed with highress models because that's the style of the map!
It was never supposed to be ultra-realistic.

Indeed

 

[infrenus]

Yeah, I'm a modeller so its like a table artisan entering the discussion between a enginner and a designer about a house but... I think both points of view are right.

I was right now testing something with cliffs and well, if the map needs to be more about the graphic, then they are kinda ugly. They look stocky, and seen a little off... I dont know, could be the bad habit new games gave to me with their fancy cliffs and stuff.

BUT iwith custon cliffs mades with raising terrain and creativity you can make all very pretty, but kill all playability. You can see over a mountain and lack these strange bonuses tht cliff give that I never understood that well, and also need too much pathing fanciness to make that map work.

So, its a matter of what side you choose as all of then say. If you want to do a pretty terrain but doesnt want to play it, dont use then (unless yo want a challenge, go wonder), but if you want to make a playable terrain, its better to sacrifice fanciness to improve performance.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Why do you hate BLIZZARD CLIFFS?

Because they allocate enough storage for 16 cliff types yet the game will only ever use the first 2.

 

[tobyfat50]

It always depends on how you use it, most of the times I use blizzard cliffs for my melee maps since this is the most effective way of making the path etc etc. Its just the matter of how creative you are and how effective you can use it.

Yes you can use the cliffs and trees but you need to make some sort of extra effort to make the picture look good it's easier to use hq models instead.
Like I said before, the quality or graphics don't matter it`s how you use them!
Go here http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/terrain-board-267/learn-terraining-226454/

 

[neo_sluf]

Yeah.....i agree with Tobyfat 50... any way are really a FAT PERSON?

 

[tobyfat50]

No that's just my nickname!

 

[WindowsVistaSucks]

Why do you hate BLIZZARD CLIFFS?
They're ugly...

Or why it is that BLIZZARD TREES is not recommended to use in RPG?
They're ugly...

Is the BLIZZARD ENTERTAINMENT will be angry because you hate those that they have made?
No.

Why do the BLIZZARD ENTERTAINMENT create a BLIZZARD CLIFF..if it just ugly?(AS HELL..xD..some says)
Because when WC3 first came out. It was decent at the time.