I am seeing a lot of hostility to the Perpetual Testing Initiative, ever since relaunching this project.
I personally see it as a huge shame that some people still hold near-elitist views to mapping. I experienced that on Thinking With Portals, where their only advice was "quit mapping".
the PTi is less advanced, yes. but can you really say it is bad? because of it, we have a way to download community maps, to create our own easier, to allow others to dip their toes into level design, and it's all rated so you can find the cream of the crop.
Yet, the PTI is bad? this is a mind-boggling situation.
I want to make it clear, I will be using Hammer eventually for Chamber One.
The key word here is, "eventually". I plan to continue editing/creating in the PTI, and then, once fully released, refine it in Hammer.
There is a way to use the PTI, while still retaining the use of Hammer. While the move is purely one-way, it is there non-the-less, so puzzles MUST be near-perfect for a smooth transferral.
To do so, simply type "puzzlemaker_export map_name", where "map_name" is the name of the exported map's file. It will export the last edited file.
So, even the whole "PTI maps are bad" cannot hold water, as PTI maps could create the basic framework of a Hammer map, without needing to tirelessly edit in Hammer. PTI can provide a solid base for puzzles. a way to easily test maps, before exporting them into another application. It even takes care of all the complex stuff, like aerial faith plate configuration.
So, don't judge the PTI by it's "mainstream-ness". see it as a potential to RAPIDLY speed up your own mapping, for editing later on. It does not have to be this kiddie-map editor that everyone hates because it creates diversity and more creative/intricate maps that, for many users, would have been much harder in Hammer.
Chamber One is being developed through the PTI. But it will be edited in Hammer, once all maps are complete to their barest. which is a pretty high standard for me.
--Kizzycocoa
Yes, PTI is bad.
PTI is bad, because exported maps to hammer are just awfuly done, screwed up by the tiling system - every 128*128 tile is brush on its own which creates significant performance drops.
Also just to give you an idea of how limited PTI is - there is probably not a single one Portal 1 or Portal 2 map you could fully recreate in PTI, not even after refining in Hammer, because even after that it would require major reworking, adding all 32 units thick walls, doors, editing the lighting (or basically deleting it completely and remaking it as all lights are instances in PTI created maps) and so on and so on...
TL;DR - PTI is bad.
I agree with most of what you are saying, but I must disagree as well.
I fully agree the exporting is bad geometry-wise. I will not pretend I know about this map layout after exporting, as I have not attempted an export as of yet. But while replacing the walls would be tedious, it surely cuts time for chambers.
If the biggest price to pay is redoing the walls? the easiest part of Hammer to comprehend? I will gladly take that price.
Again, I do not pretend to know how these maps work, and will research that tomorrow with my latest chamber, "Chamber One - Four". in the meantime, I am more than confident that, if the only issue is the "casing" of tests, then it is well worth it.
especially as most advance hammer editing is purely visual. it is very rare for a gameplay element to not conform to a PTI-style layout, in regards to blockiness. I cannot think of a chamber that doesn't conform to the blockiness of the PTI.
Well it really differs on what you expect from your map.
I agree, its good for getting the basic layouts done - sort of a brainstorm, ideas realizing editor, kind of. But even then, you will basically have to delete every single wall and redo it , detail it yourself etc. etc.
It also bothers me, that every single thing is an instance, this has, however, bugged me since the release of the tools and thus is not PTI's fault nor problem.
Another thing, that I imagine would have to be redone for most chambers is I/O - complete lack of logic instances and triggers (basically the only trigger avalible in PTI is trigger_hurt and trigger_fizzler which makes it all very limited) etc. etc.
I was a bit too harsh when I said PTI is bad, of course it's not -that- bad and the tool itself along with Steam Workshop is pretty neat, it's just the way it works makes it very unconvinient tool for serious projects of greater size than a mappack.
Basically, PTI can serve you as a helper, but as long as you are serious with your mod, you are going to use Hammer for most of the stuff. I can guarantee that.
I agree with all of that.
Instances have annoyed me since day 1, and the I/O of maps is so primitive, it relies on using in-game entities, such as lasers and panels, in a separate cut-off room.
I do also agree, far too few triggers. However, I hear they are expanding that, and the PTI in general.
Serious mods, yeah, I'll agree to that too. This is more of a casual map pack than anything. But, while I see it is lengthy to rebuild the maps, I truly believe it is worth it, if only for the entities.
Plus, do not forget this particular mod is based on using the exact same chamber over and over. So, most of my geometry can simply be copied. If it were a string of largely different maps, I'd see a lot more urgency. But this is the beauty of Chamber One. Is is basically the same chamber.
Still, for regular maps and the like, I can see why it would be bad. But to sacrifice the geometry to test what would take ~1 week to perfect, and develop it all in just a few days? And then take another two days to fix it in hammer, and add decoration? Already we're looking at what could be a chamber built completely, but two/three days quicker. I may be off somewhere, but I doubt I'd be off by three days.
Still, I do agree with your concerns. But I do believe it is beneficial in the end to use the PTI, especially for the type of map pack that uses the exact same layout, more or less.
Yeah, I suppose using PTI has its ups and downs, just like Hammer has its ups, but is - for example not as convienient to use.
Regarding the expansion of PTI - I guess that would be only logical, however, I am not able to take 'hearsays' into account and thus I judge what I've been given and I can see and try out myself.
For this particular mappack, sure, not a bad tool. For me, personally, if I know, I have to fix the tiling systm afterwards and so on, and so on, its much more convinient to basically start from scratch in hammer right away and at least I'll know every single input, output, entity etc.
Hammer has taught me a lto, how game design works, made me familiar with Source engine, made me familiar with mapping. Which is something invaluable, something PTI does not simply offer you. You may be familiar with your PTI map, but most people won't know what entity is, etc. (not claiming that is a bad thing, of course not, just kinda... nostalgic way of saying what hammer taught me and not much relevant here hehe...)
Either way, it's all about personal preferences. While some prefer PTI - some prefer Hammer. And some build their maps in notepad (Yep, that's possible too).
"Whatever floats your boat" they say, don't they?
Completely agree. It's all about your map style, and how you work best.
I personally prefer a very visual style, and the PTI does that quite beautifully. Though hammer is also good. The things I can't understand are the more advance map editing, like AI paths and the like. Typically I make map geometry/textures in hammer within a day. I think myself as an architect of sorts, so code? Eww.
regardless, I'm checking out this geometry issue. What comes to mind is VALVe needs to make it so you can merge brushes. But, I'll see what the situation is, and reply back.
wow. this is a messed up VMF, that's for sure.
it's workable. but not by much. I can see how it will be a challenge.
Probrably just be easier to make it in Hammer. Besides, If you're just gonna be copying the same chamber over and over, Shouldn't you have a base chamber you could copy and edit?
yeah. for now, I plan to make it in this, as changing things is as simple as a single click, and for now, the chambers are of an acceptable quality.
I may cross-edit the chambers when transferring them to hammer. copy in all the entities, then modify the brushwork around the entities to achieve the same look, but likely quicker, and easily better customisable-wise.