Category talk:Portal 2 Level Design

From Valve Developer Community
Revision as of 13:42, 6 July 2011 by StephenB (talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

my gelpump tutorial

is it made good enought for this wiki or can i do something better?

Looks good. Please sign your comments next time. --StephenB 06:42, 6 July 2011 (PDT)

Correct tutorials

I've noticed that many of the tutorials detail creating various things from scratch, while they already exist as instances. I don't know much about instances, but wouldn't it be better to have the tutorial tell how to do it the easiest way? Unsigned comment added by Grim Tuesday (talkcontribs). Please use four tildes (~~~~) to sign your username.

Yes, Valve obviously intends them to be used. Instances are simply more powerful prefabs, people should get used to working with them; it's easy to understand and speeds workflow. A case study of individual instances is not a bad idea, but there's no reason to have that in a general tutorial.--Nick D. 15:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
An instance is like a mini-level inside another level, so it can work for very complex things that don't change at all, but they're not really useful for the little things. Also, please sign your discussion posts. --JZ Bradley 10:15, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I disagree, instances are helpful even for the small and simple things. The lone fact that you need to edit only one file to update all instances in all maps using it makes them very powerful. From a programmer's view, instances can be compared with libraries: you simply use them and don't need to know what exactly they do and how they work, as long they work as expected. Prefabs, on the other side, are just code snippets, copy-pasted into the main() function... so yeah, we really need more tutorials on how to use existing instances, explain their parameters and proxy inputs/outputs instead of how to create them from scratch. --Barracuda 10:45, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I think we have different ideas of what small is, heh heh. It would be good to have tutorials on the Valve instances, but most of the tutorials are either for things that don't have instances or were written pre-SDK. I guess I could start on that today. --JZ Bradley 14:08, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

'Detailing metal walls' link

I don't think this tutorial for Portal should be included in Portal 2's mapping guide. Portal's two most recognizable textures were the metal walls (as seen in the link) and concrete tiles. Along with more sets of textures used in test chambers, Portal 2 introduces a whole new way of thinking about how test chambers are set up and it doesn't exactly follow to the standards set in that tutorial.—Mattshu 09:39, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree. -Nacimota Talk | Contributions 23:32, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
I disagree. For some chambers it could be usefull.--Dmx6 14:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Stalemate detected. Editing procedure cannot continue unless a stalemate associate is present to press the stalemate resolution button. —Mattshu 20:25, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I see. [chuckle] --Nacimota Talk | Contributions 03:13, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
*press* --Super200 17:47, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Alphabetization

I'm thinking the elements list should be alphabetized; anyone agree or am I just nitpicking? --Nacimota Talk | Contributions 03:13, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed!--Msleeper 04:27, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Tutorials

Several of the articles in the "elements" section are tutorials, but are not named or sorted as such. I think we should have a "Level Creation Tutorials" section and articles such as "Panels Rotate" should be renamed to "Creating rotating panels". Thelonesoldier 22:23, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. This category needs more conformity. —Mattshu 05:06, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Each element page should have a tutorial on it, I don't see the need to split up the descriptions and the tutorials. Just add each one to Category:Portal 2 Tutorials. --Nick D. 20:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Makes more sense that way. --Msleeper 01:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Whoever changed the list of elements to icons, it looks like crap

See above. --Msleeper 01:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

That was me, I thought it might be neat, but I'm also not liking it now (because of how they blend with the text). I'll change it back. --Nick D. 02:21, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree with msleeper. Keep to words, it was confusing and it looks messy. --Motanum
Yeah, it looks much nicer the way the unofficial wiki has it http://wiki.p2mods.com --Ljdp
Too bad nobody cares about them. --Msleeper 05:36, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

The names of the Themes are really dumb

I have no idea who named the theme pages, but they are horrible. Destroyed should be Overgrown. Behind the Scenes should be Manufacturing, etc. Really guys, come on.--MrFourVideoCards 07:57, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I didn't change it, but these names seem to be closer to what Valve uses. At least they're frequently appearing in several folders and files:
  • destroyed/destructed/destruction/dirty - Ruins in the first two chapters
  • clean/labs - Normal, clean test chamber environment
  • bts/industrial - Behind the Scenes, factory and everything behind the test chambers
  • underground - Old Aperture
--Barracuda 09:13, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
I changed them back and added some additional text. I think referring to them by what their material sets is called is a smart idea. "BTS" has been around since Portal 1, so I don't see how could be any confusion there. --Msleeper 22:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
To avoid conflict and keep consistency, I think the official names referenced by the file paths should be used. They may not be very descriptive or accurate, but I can add a table which indicates the chapters/sections of the campaign that use them. Also, the pages don't reflect this, but there are definitely sub-themes under each of those four; I saw a post on Reddit that listed 7 or so. --Nick D. 13:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Disclaimer at Top

Is it really necessary to have that disclaimer at the top? The page would be cleaner without it, and I think the name and categories already convey that information quite clearly. --Nick D. 22:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Every page about Level creation for other games have this. --Mehiller 22:58, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
If every other level creation page walked off a cliff would you do it too? </kidding> --JZ Bradley 10:19, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I will make all what possible and this page will walked off a cliff too. But at the moment all pages have this. So we must do not ruin design. --Mehiller 11:33, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Buttons and Switches

So I've created a new page--Buttons and Switches (Portal 2)--to replace the previous Buttons page. I did so because I thought the title more accurately reflected the page's content. In addition, I added some info about the cube-specific and sphere-specific buttons. I've linked to the older page on the new one because I'm not sure what to do with the old one; I don't want to outright delete it. I'm perfectly open to the change being reverted, I just thought I'd try to help out. If everyone's alright with it I'll keep adding some info in the near future.--WinstonSmith 04:49, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

You should instead have moved the old page since there's lots of duplicate information now which is bad. Now you should at least check that Buttons and Switches (Portal 2) contains all info from Buttons (Portal 2) for sure and then mark the old one for deletion; although I can't exactly see why you thought this was a good idea in the first place; the 'switches' look more like 'buttons' to me in that sense anyway. Also the layout of the old page is a bit more appealing to me even though it has some spacing issues. --Biohazard 00:07, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Point taken; come to think of it I believe the only reason I did this may have been for title clarification. Changes have been undone; the category now links to the original Buttons page (with cube-specific and sphere-specific button info added)--though I've kept the link text "Buttons and Switches" for clarity--and the Buttons and Switches page is now cleared and redirects to the original Buttons page. Thanks for the feedback.--WinstonSmith 00:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks; it's better that way imho. Also redirection is certainly more favorable indeed. --Biohazard 00:52, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I'd like a more user-friendly way of loading custom maps, especially for co-op maps. Hopefully this will be implemented with the first DLC. --StephenB 20:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)