Talk:TF2/Respawn Areas

This article seems to be somewhat similar to this other one: Creating_a_Spawnroom. Perhaps they should be merged into one article?

Plus: This article is linked to from the Team Fortress 2 Level Creation page, whereas the other one isn't. Maybe it should be added? Is the latter a TF2-only article (since it refers to team RED team, resupply, etc, which is clearly TF2 related)?? --Etset 08:05, 10 Jan 2008 (PST)

The Creating_a_Spawnroom article is one of the original TF2 Mapping articles, and represents the "old way" of organizing articles. TF2/Respawn Areas, TF2/Resupply Areas and a few others, are actually the result of a Split on that article, and basically replace it. The old all-in-one articles were harder to add information to, and made it more difficult to find specific information. For example, if you were looking for information on Resupply Areas, you had to know that it was buried in Creating_a_Spawnroom. Same if you wanted to add new information on JUST Resupply Areas, or Team-Specific Doors, etc before the split.

In short, they should not be merged. I don't think we should add a link from Team Fortress 2 Level Creation, because we want to encourage the "split" style of organization to facilitate reference and growth. Perhaps the Creating_a_Spawnroom article could be summarized as a part of TF2/Basic_Map_Construction instead? --Daeval 15:49, 10 Jan 2008 (PST)

I don't approve your idea. And no, we don't want to encourage "split" style organization, I would never be able to do a complete tutorial in such a short way for example. You MAY split up the Team Fortress 2 Level Creation's tutorial section into "long, in-depth" and "short, split, whatevertheyouknowwhat" subsections. I agree that some might look for small informations as "how do I build a resupply cabinet" (taking into account that he's too stupid to look around in his prefabs :P), okay, split style works everyone is happy. Now if we have a beginner bump into this page it's quite different. He does not know what elements does he need and he will be lost. A long, in-depth and still comprehensible tutorial will help him build up what he wants piece by piece. (In short: I don't want to see you removing it - and now that I look at it you didn't even bother adding it...) --Baliame ^(talk) 06:40, 11 Jan 2008 (PST)

Perhaps in this case the "long-style" article is the best choice, since it does contain all the information and yet is not monstrously big, nor is it hard to follow. Because if you look at it, the Creating_a_Spawnroom really does describe all aspects of creating a spawn room and the whole thing is already a kind of "sub-topic" by itself. By breaking it up into smaller "sub-sub-topics" you might be gaining points in documentation maintenance, but perhaps you're losing points in accessibility and readability of that information. That's my opinion.

Furthermore, I don't think its healthy to have two sets of articles (one of them being actually just one article: Creating_a_Spawnroom) about the same topic, unless they individually offer clear advantages for the user. One example could be to keep the Creating_a_Spawnroom article as it is (at any given point in the future, if it became excessively big or disorganized, it could be split into different parts; that happens all the time) and transform the smaller articles into one "5-minute-short-summarized-breakdown" version of Creating_a_Spawnroom. But then again, Creating_a_Spawnroom is already quite short, so this really isn't necessary. I do applaud your work and commitment Daeval, but I think I'm going to stick with Baliame on this one!

Final note: perhaps Creating_a_Spawnroom should be moved to TF2/Creating_a_Spawnroom, since it's specific to TF2, and not a general level design article (which is what the title currently suggests).

Cheers go out for Daeval, Baliame and Gear for jobs well done. :) --Etset 07:26, 11 Jan 2008 (PST)

Yeah a spawn room is a generally easy thing to make, and with that said, thankyou. Mainly splitting it up isn't so bad, but to me I think its a bit nice, as people might per-say want to implement a resupply area outside of the spawn room, or instead just make a resupply room instead, that players can just walk into and get health and ammo. Keeping it split for now is okay, an as for highlighting it as a TF2/creating a spawnroom would be a bit dumb, as its already under the TF2 section, so that automatically categorizes it for any user.--Gear 07:49, 11 Jan 2008 (PST)

I know what some of you mean, and I DO see the value of the comprehensive tutorial to someone who is new to mapping. But as Gear pointed out, having them split has its advantages as well. The TF2/Basic Map Construction article was meant to be the bridge between the two styles. It is the "beginner" article that leads the newcomer to the pieces she needs. It could definitely use some work, but that's its intended purpose.

Comprehensive tutorials could be summarized within the TF2/Basic Map Construction article for new people, and linked to the split articles for details. That way, we have both the complete info for a newbie, and the easy-to-maintain, easy-to-reference specific info for more advanced users, without having to synchronize them as things are added. What do you all think? --Daeval 14:49, 11 Jan 2008 (PST)

Your ignorance starts to annoy me --Baliame ^(talk) 06:30, 12 Jan 2008 (PST)

This is a wiki, it is about putting heads together to make the content the best that it can be, and sometimes that means discussing that content in a reasonable manner. Yes, there will be disagreements, but we need to work those out without resulting to insults. Differing opinions can be good for a wiki, but it must always be remembered that the pages of a wiki are public, collaborative spaces and not any one person's project, even if they are the only author for the moment. I am willing to put this insult behind us, but I will ask that you do the same for the attitude that produced it. Let us discuss things like grown men and work together to make the best resource we can! --Daeval 07:47, 12 Jan 2008 (PST)

Now now ... don't start making things personal. If you want some respect, show some respect as well. This is a wiki, and the main objective is to inform and help, not quarrel. If something is not to your approval, discuss it, don't go offending people.

On-topic: We'll leave the articles as they are for now, and promote inter-linkage between them all, so that the user (yes, we're building this especially for other users, not simply for personal benefit...) may access all information available on the subject. Regarding the tutorials: those which do not have a "vague title" (as in "this-title-could-mean-ANY-game-but-in-fact-the-tutorial-is-specific-to-<THIS>-game") aren't really a priority, even though they don't possess the format shortgamename/tutorialname. Those tutorials with "vague titles" should be high on our priority list to standardize. --Etset 06:47, 12 Jan 2008 (PST)

Back on track, I agree with you here. During the course of this conversation, we have established the usefulness of both extended tutorials and collections of specialized information. What I had proposed was meant as a compromise, but at this point, you're right, all we really have to do is link the two - where each section of the full tutorial links to the element's advanced page, and the element pages link back to the basic tutorials where appropriate. And yeah, the TF2/ on the title should be a priority. --Daeval 07:47, 12 Jan 2008 (PST)

Indeed, but imagine if I were to write the article Creating_a_Spawnroom_in_Day_Of_Defeat:_Source, people can go: well what does TF2 have that DOD:S doesn't have? Why is it that the the TF2-article has a general title? Perhaps to us it might not make any difference, because we already know where the article came from, what it's about, and what pages link to it. It's a question of organization, nothing else.

Imagine it this way around: a newcomer types in a search for Creating a Spawnroom to find general information on the subject (perhaps even having in mind other third-party mods) and our well-known page pops up. What might happen next is: "ok, in this tutorial we're going to create a room for the RED team ... RED team? Are those the AXIS? The Terrorists? What RED team?" (a few minutes later) "Where's the func_respawnroomvisualizer entity??? My dod.fgd / cs.fgd / othermod.fgd does not have it!!!". Do you see what I mean? :) That can be easily prevented, right at the root of the problem. At least that's my opinion. Cheers --Etset 08:05, 11 Jan 2008 (PST)

Yeah thats very true, consider it done now.--Gear 09:26, 11 Jan 2008 (PST)

Yes, I propose that we now all categorize our tutorials by creating it under the name shortgamename/tutorialname. --Baliame ^(talk) 11:23, 11 Jan 2008 (PST)

Yeah does make it easier tbh, so lets do that then. I'll take care of moving any that arent named that already.--Gear 13:17, 11 Jan 2008 (PST)