Beta Release of Mill for Source

[ma_cherie]

Where's the de_rizzuh map!?

[HACKER HELL STORM]

for everybody saying teh map looks crappy and tehy did a bad job and tehirs not enough colors...

CS-Nation member, peagle, informs us that CAL has released a BETA version de_cpl_mill for Counter-Strike: Source.

maybe its not finished?!? could it be?!

[kyleb]

Beta means feature-complete but not fully bug tested. If they called it an alpha then you would have a point about the possibility of the map simply not being dressed up yet.

[Venom666]

HAHAHA hes one of that guys that were playing CSS "beta" and to every bug we found they said: STFU noob its BETA!!! BETAAAAAAA!!!



LOL

[Thortok2000]

HHS, remember, it's a beta. Which means if we see flaws with it, we're gonna point them out. And remember, it's a beta, so that's what we should be doing, is pointing out flaws, so they'll change them. Because remember, it's a beta.

[-:Nighthawk:-]

I'm cracking up about VuLLrath's choke/loss comments. With a cl_updaterate of 100 what are you expecting? Seriously, unless you're at a LAN party, that's probably way too high for most connections / servers. Even that cl_cmdrate is rather high, and turn the lag comphensation back on eh? Also drop your overall rate a bit if you're still getting loss...

Zips wrote..

There's enough to look at once the killing starts. You don't play CS for the scenery all the time, do you? I know I don't.

The point is, I play CS. :) If I was in a position of just watching it, as a spectator, then yes, I'd want the scenery to be good all the time to complement the action. Why settle for "good action in a boring environment" when you can have everything good?

[mcmoohee]

On the other hand, I believe it's very possible to achieve a beautiful map that plays extremely well. The trick is finding a mapper that can balance it all out. From what I understand, CSS is essentially a visual upgrade to 1.6 - but it looks like people are either attempting to make something incredibly fancy, or overly bland and professional.

[Pharlap]

Zips wrote..

There's enough to look at once the killing starts. You don't play CS for the scenery all the time, do you? I know I don't.

think hes talking about spectators from all backgrounds, not only the hardcore csers who care little for gfx, but also curious people, who definitely do look at the gfx. gfx+gameplay=powerful combo. by itself...well...not much really.

ukHazard wrote..

cl_rate doesn't exist

in non-source its used to cap the upload rate which is set to 10kb/s by default.

-:Nighthawk:- wrote..

I'm cracking up about VuLLrath's choke/loss comments. With a cl_updaterate of 100 what are you expecting? Seriously, unless you're at a LAN party, that's probably way too high for most connections / servers. Even that cl_cmdrate is rather high, and turn the lag comphensation back on eh? Also drop your overall rate a bit if you're still getting loss...

i used high rates 5 years ago when i was on 56k. never caused a problem, in fact made things smoother. then the new netcode came along...

[entRo]

-:Nighthawk:- wrote..

I'm cracking up about VuLLrath's choke/loss comments. With a cl_updaterate of 100 what are you expecting? Seriously, unless you're at a LAN party, that's probably way too high for most connections / servers. Even that cl_cmdrate is rather high, and turn the lag comphensation back on eh? Also drop your overall rate a bit if you're still getting loss...

Uh..? cl_updaterate 100 is the standard for both LAN and online competition. I've used it for years both online and LAN, and it's given me no problems. It's not his updaterate that's screwing things up, it must be something else.

The point is, I play CS. :) If I was in a position of just watching it, as a spectator, then yes, I'd want the scenery to be good all the time to complement the action.

Well yea, that'd be nice, but I think people who tune in to watch matches are watching the games for the gameplay. For the action and teamplay, and probably don't really notice the environment that much. I don't think the aim of CAL or the CPL is to get outsiders to the e-sports scene to sit down and watch full matches and get real in to it, because that's not a realistic goal. Bringing in people already accustomed to the general CS community is much more realistic.

Why settle for "good action in a boring environment" when you can have everything good?

Because I'm sure it's really tough to balance both out, and I havn't seen a map yet that looks really pretty and plays really well. Don't say the new inferno, don't even try it.



You guys are bashing the map because it's not all pimped out and doesn't have stupid props laying around everywhere like the other maps Valve has ported over. This map was made specifically for competition, by the CAL/CPL, and there was only so much to work with on the HL engine. You're right, we're already accustomed to the layout of the map from playing it in 1.6 and previous versions, and it plays flawlessly, why change it? I know you guys love to jump on the "pros cant learn anything new" bandwagon, and while it's untrue, that isn't even the issue. I think the CPL/CAL has looked at Valve's mistakes with dust2, inferno, and whatever other maps were completely butchered (they did do a nice job with cbble though) and kept it the same. Finally, someone listens to the old "if it's not broke, don't fix it" saying.



Mill has some of the best gameplay you can find, and when you have gameplay that good, who gives a shit what it looks like? Competition isn't about "lolol this is lyke a real looking place", it's about winning the match. As long as the map isn't a total eyesore (cpl_fire, god damnit I hate that map), and plays well, it's good to go for competition.



The map doesn't need any props, because they serve no real purpose in competitive play. They're filler and eye candy, and they get in the way more than they help.

[[CyW]-=BigBear=-]

entRo wrote..

I don't think the aim of CAL or the CPL is to get outsiders to the e-sports scene to sit down and watch full matches and get real in to it, because that's not a realistic goal. Bringing in people already accustomed to the general CS community is much more realistic.

You better go talk to Angel Munoz from CAL & CPL then, because he always says it's their goal to make e-sports mainstream like any other sport outhere..

[Zips]

-:Nighthawk:- wrote..

The point is, I play CS. :) If I was in a position of just watching it, as a spectator, then yes, I'd want the scenery to be good all the time to complement the action. Why settle for "good action in a boring environment" when you can have everything good?

99.99999% of the people who bother to watch e-sports either play the game already, or focus more on the action, strategy, and tense moments more than anything.



There was this show on G4TV I caught the other day. It was something where they had these two teams going against each other in Call of Duty. The graphics really didn't look all that great for that game, now two years old, but the action was enjoyable enough to watch. A game, I don't know, have never played before, and is two years old, was interesting to watch because of the constant action and not because of the graphics.



People who watch games online either already own the game (in order to even watch) and thusly already have an appreciation for the "wow" factor in graphics from having played it themselves. You have to realize, CAL and the like make maps for the gamers, not for the spectators. They already know people are going to watch, just because. They want to make the gamers happy by doing a "direct port" approach that won't have every single e-sports person complaining about a misplaced box.

[Thortok2000]

I wouldn't know about props and such affecting gameplay or 'harming more than they help' since I don't have source myself, but I think there's more things you can do to change the map that won't affect the layout at all. Make the skybox prettier, alter the areas that are rarely used to have more stuff.



It's just boring having to look at boxes and walls on perfectly flat floors. You're really not taking advantage of the source engine when you do that. There's plenty of ways to add in graphical features while having basically the exact same map, look at the upgrade from de_inferno in 1.6 to de_inferno_cz in CZ, and that was in basically the same engine.

[entRo]

Thortok2000 wrote..

but I think there's more things you can do to change the map that won't affect the layout at all. Make the skybox prettier, alter the areas that are rarely used to have more stuff.

Why? This map is for competition, not public play.

It's just boring having to look at boxes and walls on perfectly flat floors.

Again, it's for competition. Your focus should be on your team and the other team, not the way the map looks.

You're really not taking advantage of the source engine when you do that.

Why bother? The point is, it plays great. That's really all that matters.

[Thortok2000]

Edited by [user="152360"] @ [time="1117940077"]

Game + graphics > game alone. Simple math.



And as far as the "don't fix what ain't broken" line goes, it's wrong.



The true phrase is "don't break what ain't broken".



Everything can be improved given enough time, energy, thought, and technology, all you have to worry about is accidentally taking a step backward.

[xlokix]

entRo wrote..

Why? This map is for competition, not public play.



Again, it's for competition. Your focus should be on your team and the other team, not the way the map looks.



Why bother? The point is, it plays great. That's really all that matters.

And how long is a competitive map going to last when it looks just like the old one. You know, it's possible to create a competitive map that looks good.