Srb2 Doom Builder "3d mode vs 2d mode"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
speed2411

speed2411

Speed2411
So I was going through a bunch of levels thinking, "Why can I not edit like these people?"

So I was wondering if it was because I use 3d mode a LOT! I do mean a lot, like if I make ONE new sector, I have to go in 3d mode to texture the sector. So I want to know what you guys think? In Srb2 Doom builder, would you rather use 3d mode to make levels or use 2d mode. Or do you use both. Or do you use neither? (Not Possible.)

Forgive me if this is the wrong place to put this. Thanks. :D
 
I'm the exact opposite end of the spectrum and I don't use 3D mode at all. If I need to see something in 3D, I simply load up the map in-game. I don't honestly think this has much to do with my ability as a map designer, although constantly testing the same areas over and over does mean that I'm more likely to notice sections of the stage that irritate me and fix them.
 
3D mode allows you to actually see and make changes to floor and FOF heights in real-time, which is extremely useful, it's easy to activate, and you can see if something screwed up in a simple manner. I use it whenever I want to auto-align textures, look at heights, or just want to see if alt-tabbing out screwed up everything (which happens sometimes but i just fix by ctrl+z-ing).

I feel it's one of those things where while some may not find it useful, it's better off being there than not being there.
 
The only time I use 3D mode is when I am doing texture alignment. Anything I feel needs testing in 3D I think is better tested in-game, where I actually know what's going to happen, rather than an approximation.
 
I use them both. Sometimes I may make the sectors in 2d mode and set them a floor height, or sometimes I may go into 3d mode and kinda use the 3d mode version of raising/lowering sectors to see what fits best. I think both views are helpful and effective. I Never use one mode only. I always must use both to get good results.
 
Well I depend on both 2D and 3D.
If I never had 3D all my textures alignment would all be off and maybe some sectors height's like FOF's. If I never had 2D I would not know if some sectors are unclosed or broken or even a thokproof wall. I rely on both for better effect's and graphics for in game play. I would never rely on on just one mode. If you want better visual effects use both modes. Even some things like zoomtube you need for 2D mode.
 
Last edited:
I do almost everything with 2D except aligning textures, because it´s easier to make map in 2D. 3D is important too. Aligning textures correctly is not easy in 2D. I use usually test level to view environment instead of 3D-mode.
 
I was exactly like you at one point. In fact, I made all of Hidden Sanctuary (http://mb.srb2.org/showthread.php?t=31068) almost entirely in 3D mode. Basically the only thing I used 2D mode for was placing objects and drawing sectors.

I didn't really mind at first, but now I wonder how I did it. Honestly - it's SO slow compared to 2D mode. Especially near the end, when lots of the level architecture was already in place, I'd draw a sector, press the 3D mode button, wait FOREVER for nodebuilder, adjust the sector a bit, exit, draw another sector, press the 3D mode button, etc etc. It's tedious and takes forever.

It's extremely helpful for beginners, though. I doubt I could've made that level without 3D mode's help. Back then I didn't quite have a feel for SRB2's size and scale, so 3D mode was the most helpful crutch I could ask for. All in all, I think it's something most level designers grow out of once they get the hang of things (that is, if they ever got dependent on it anyway :P)
 
The thing is, it is really hard for me to picture the level and the changes I make. 3D mode helps me. Infact, I have a level pack that I am almost finishing and it looks pretty good. (Not. The newest update will fix most stuff.)

W is the 3d mode shortcut. Makes it easier to exit and enter. Also, depending on your computer and the length of your level, Nodebuilder can finish faster.
 
speed2411 said:
The thing is, it is really hard for me to picture the level and the changes I make.
Click to expand...

That's something you pick up as you make stages. The more you use 2D mode, the more comfortable you get by comparing numbers in relation to other numbers and you start understanding the heights and geometry of the stage from top-down view.
 
Here are some little "2D mode rules" as I like to keep them in my head. These may seem obvious to some, but they may help out:

-Use whichever grid size you want for making your the outlines of your rooms (I usually use the 256 grid), but for detailing I usually use 64 size squares or 32 size. I only use smaller for REALLY small details or when I need to. The 64 grid also represents 1 little GFZ block on the ground.

-8 clicks up or down in the floor/ceiling height box makes your platform exactly 1 GFZ block higher or lower (64 pixels) , which is a comfortable jumping height for any character. 2 GFZ blocks (16 clicks) makes a platform inaccessable from just jumping. The player will need to either climb up to that platform or blue-spring himself up. Note that the 2 GFZ block platform looks kinda like you should be able to reach it, and sonic just BARELY misses pulling him self up onto it, so you should likely make those a bit higher than just 2 GFZ blocks (128 pixels) just to communicate better to the player.

-Different shapes of control sectors represent different actions. I make fofs regular squares, water thin little rectangles, linedef executors triangles, etc etc. I assign different shapes to different types and it helps me find control sectors easier when I get tons of the little buggers. Hell, sometimes I draw useless sectors around groupings of control sectors that represent what that group is being used toward. For example, I have little houses sprinkled about a level I'm making, so any sectors that correspond to a house are surrounded by a crude, 0-height sector shaped like a house so I know what they are.

Those are all I can think of for now. I'm sure I have a LOT more. Anyone else has little rules or principles they follow when in 2D mode?
 
Ice's second rule is something I keep in mind all the time, but I have my own "rules" regarding the other aspects of 2D mode:

grouping.png

I personally prefer making different rows for control sectors, with each row signifying a different type of FOF. From top to bottom, the sectors in the image would correspond to intangible blocks, wind sectors, quicksand blocks, water blocks and regular solid blocks respectively.
If the map in question is large (read: single player map), I still use this row-system but place blocks of them near the thok barriers of the areas they're relevant to. In smaller stages (multiplayer maps), I put all the control sectors in one block near the thok barrier, like in the image.

As for grid size, I mostly use 32 size squares, for larger structures I use 64 size squares, for smaller structures and thing placement I use 16 size squares.
 
I really do not see how you build without 3d mode. Perhaps a video would help. I will try to make a map with only 2d mode though. I am still interested in other peoples thoughts.
 
speed2411 said:
I really do not see how you build without 3d mode. Perhaps a video would help. I will try to make a map with only 2d mode though. I am still interested in other peoples thoughts.
Click to expand...

3D mode is in no way necessary if you learn how to use the program enough to know what the scale is for sizes and such.
 
speed2411 said:
I really do not see how you build without 3d mode. Perhaps a video would help. I will try to make a map with only 2d mode though. I am still interested in other peoples thoughts.
Click to expand...

It is rather simple to create entire map just using the 2D mode. Here an example of my work mostly done in 2D mode.

30ijrdd.png

The map is a desert theme with over 39 FOF's. Of course if you look closely, you can see that most of the FOF's are on top of a bunch of smaller sectors. Its a rather pain to work with. But its still doable.

Now I do use 3D mode, when it comes to doing textures. Since textures alone with out 3D mode can be a pain. As for knowing how certain sectors work, or if the map is well detailed. I test the map on and off. But the map making it self, is done completely in 2D.
 
You can totally do a map without 3D mode; it's just a bit harder, since you have to visualize heights in your head, or a bit slower, since you'd have to boot up the game whenever you needed a visual representation that your head couldn't provide.
 
Slower is suggestive. I know loading one of my levels through the netlauncher takes all but 15 seconds, but loading 3D mode takes a whole minute if the map is big.
 
It's like anything else; just practice. When I noticed that I was relying too much on 3D mode, I just decided to make a simple, blocky, GFZ-ish level (all in 2D mode!) to practice. While the layout was simple and the level was short, I think the exercise helped a lot.

My level was called Sunset Ridge Zone, I believe, but I don't actually have the file anymore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Who is viewing this thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Back
Top