Rman Virgil wrote:
I think it would be very worthwhile based on most of the maps that have been made the last 6 months.
There are a few exceptions, of course, but most are not much different than ones made 10 years ago.
There are a number of reasons for that but the one I think is the most telling is that making aesthetically high quality & complex maps (non-flat, non-mirrored geometry, naturalistic, etc) is very time consuming and most are into the instant gratification of putting just a few hours at most into creating a map derived from 10 year-old metrics (also, many cannot make anything but really simple HMs, if that).
And this is where
Diorama would come in, IMO, for those map-makers with limited time-frames to work on new maps. They could generate a random map with
Diorama, bata-bing-bata-boom, then bring it into Flail 13's
flaME and spend those few hours customizing & modifying, in highly original ways, to create maps that are not the same 'ol from a decade past.
Anyway, that's this mans practical PoV on making this effort, for what ever it's worth.
- RV
.
Since I made the suggestion I figured, belatedly, I should quickly test it.
One minor prob with the idea I just discovered -
Diorama generates a type
dinit.bjo that is unknown to
flaME so that you cannot directly bring-in the Diorama map.wz for that extensive editing in flaME... out-of-the box, that is. The solution, for the moment, is to replace the
Diorama generated
dinit.bjo with one generated by 32EW or flaME. The game binary recognizes both types
dinit.bjo. Weird. Weird in that I do not understand the "why" of any of it but still figured out this awkward work-around - for whatever it's worth.
- RV
.
