Would you be in favor of randomly generated multiplayer maps in FPS and RTS games?

[Brawndo]

Gaming technology has progressed to the point that this should be possible as an option. My question is, do we 1) value balance and slick design, and reward veteran players who have learned the nuances of each map, or do we 2) value new experiences each time that level the playing field more for all players?

I would go with the latter. The way I look at it, in real life armies and soldiers often do not have advance knowledge of their terrain, and this would encourage players on both sides to play more cautiously and deliberately. Of course, this would work better with certain types of games and less with others

 

[Gahars]

I wouldn't. The new experiences would be nice, sure.

However, already designed maps provide for better balance and structure that cannot really be provided through a random selection of different parts. But that's just me.

 

[bobthekillerclown]

Real life soldiers and armies DO have advanced knowledge of the terrain. Sat imaging, local intell, even 60 y/o maps. we may not know the nitty grittys but we have a damn good idea of what we get ourselves into(Cav scout U.S. army). That being said, I would go with option 1 just; please make the damn maps bigger.

 

[mattttherman3]

That would be pretty sweet, but a massive undertaking to actually implement. Nice challenge though.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

Do you give up memorable places in favor of generic cop-outs? A randomly generated terrain or building is going to have a lot less character than a prefabricated one, and no matter how advanced the engine will still produce inexplicable breaks in logic.

 

[Wicky_42]

Hmm, both have merits. Well balanced, cunningly tuned maps vs something new and unique each time, with maximum advantage to be eked from the terrain ad-hock over the course of a game. Throw in some dynamic terrain features (vulnerable bridges, avalanche-prone mountains, narrow passes, bogs, flood plains in heavy rain etc etc) and you could have a really awesome setting for an RTS. Not competitive to tourney standards, but none the less sweet in concept.

 

[blankedboy]

That'd be VERY difficult to do well. How do you get a symbolic map like Face-Capture randomly generated? All the maps would follow some strict rules, there'd still need to be alot of customisation. Look at Oblige, which randomly generates Doom maps. They all have a similar feel to them, none of them have the detail or care of a map made by a human. Humanmade maps are always better, so no.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

No. What you gain in variety you lose in utility. There are some very good reasons for the basic designs inherent in modern multiplayer maps that have been discovered over more than a decade of tinkering with them. Worse still, with a random element you tend to introduce an element of unexpected imbalance, which is just about the least acceptable thing in either an RPG or an RTS.

 

[Aenir]

In most cases randomly generated would be disastrous. There's a reason for why they reveal the entire terrain in Starcraft 2 when they hadn't in Brood War.

Even Left 4 Dead 2 is very limited, with only different paths changing slightly.

And then there's Diablo where it doesn't fucking matter what the terrain is and random is good.

It COMPLETELY depends on the individual game and the implementation and execution.

 

[Marik2]

I'd pick both options if it was possible.

Like having different playlists for both groups of people

 

[TerranReaper]

Randomly generated maps tend to run into the field of "imbalance" and it brings in luck which isn't very well desired in any kind of competitive game. Also, RTS games tend to favor more symmetrical maps or at least maps where one player does not have any kind of an advantage just because he started somewhere different.

 

[Defense]

I'd partially like this, but only if everything about the whole map wasn't randomly generated. Maybe it'd be nice if the map was split into 4 quadrants and each of the quadrants could become a number of different variations, maybe 5. You would still have a feeling of randomness, but it would still be somewhat familiar.

Pseud-randomisation sounds like a nice idea. Playing the same old map can get boring, but at least you don't spend the match wondering where you are.

 

[Veylon]

First off, there's no reason a randomly generated map cannot be symmetrical. Heck, I used to have a mapmaker for Warcraft 2 that made symmetrical maps even for odd numbers of players. And that came out in the early nineties. So that settles balance.

Second off, a generated map need not lack structure. Even in the Civilization games the world can be generated around continental plates and mountain ranges with rivers that run into the sea and resources grouped in key areas.

Generators are built around rules. Rules can specify open arena areas or cramped tunnels, they can lump the land into one mass or spread it out over an archipelago, they can throw down a craggy mountain range with unknown passes or create a base of a dozen floors. The key point is that they can, when done well, give you back some of the mystery and uncertainty that you started the game with.

And, of course, even handmade maps can benefit from some randomness within them. The weather or time of day can be different, the bridges may be up or out, towns may be bustling or abandoned, the tides may be up or down, the rivers might be dry or at flood stage. All of things can change which strategies would be appropriate.