You people are crazy!

[mazman34340]

Who-ever had the over-head on Source's development tools needs to be shot. Why is the particle editor separate from Hammer? Why do you have to jump through hoops to get industry standard Maya files into Source? Why must I learn .bsp and the command line system to even install / launch these tools? (Admittedly, it would improve my overall computing skills).

VTF is fairly simple program but then I have to learn the VMT files.

UDK: particle editing, scripting, lighting, animation are all in the program. Maya and most 3D programming files enter easily. Kismet is glorious! I don't have to separately edit textures.

Crytek: Sure, its not too popular but its visuals are ungodly.

No wonder my level-design professor kept asking me why I wanted to create a map from Hammer. My friends kept asking me why I am using hammer. Virtually no-one in the whole Game Design floor in my school uses Hammer. If I learn all this crap, I will be the only Hammer expert in my university. I would be an expert for a development tool that is becoming critically outdated.

...

Oh... hai there. Sorry, I was ranting.

So, I came here to develop a couple maps to learn level design and environment design. Not as easy as I thought it would be.

I still want to make a map but its annoying how I can't put in my own models, unless I get some help in the MESA program.

*blegh* Too tired to continue the introduction, need sleep.

[Armageddon]

This is game development. Welcome to the club.

Source is very easy after awhile, you learn the quirks of the tools and learn to avoid them. If you want to see real awful engines try learning the Build Engine for Duke3D, or DarkGen for Thief 1 & 2.

UDK: Yes it's nice and pretty but you still have to make the content yourself, 100%. Source at least you can use HL2 assets for awhile. That's the main draw, that and the really easy scripting system and physics.

CryEngine: You realize that it takes four CryTek studios, probably around 800-1000 to make a game look good on that engine? It's not suitable for one person or even a few. Look at some indie games on CryEngine, they look awful.

[Dives]

Because Source Engine is from 2004. Source 2 is coming soon. Just hold onto your pants for a little while longer.

[Mehis]

Everything that Arma said. Once you get used to it, it's very simple.
IMO, it's not that bad. Creating and putting your models to Source is quite time consuming at first but you'll get used to it.

What do you mean by learning bsp and command line system? If you're just there to make maps, launch Source SDK, Hammer and do your thing.

Though, if you're seriously saying that you do not have any type of knowledge on Hammer or Source engine already, you shouldn't even touch it. It will take LONG time before you can even call yourself an expert mapper on Hammer and most of your time would be wasted in your university.

[Smurftyours]

Source 2 is coming soon

THIS IS VALVE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.......

[Black_Stormy]

UDK is far and away superior to source, no one is going to debate that. It's a newer engine and the developers focus is as much on the tools as it is the engine. People use source because they have access to all of the textures and models from all other source games, therefore it's easier to mod. Source is old, decrepit, and not supported in any official sense. I think it's valves way of separating the wheat from the chaff. Only really dedicated and tenacious people are going to put in the time required to make something truly great on source.

UDK is an artists toolset, SDK is a modders toolset.

Also stop deluding yourself Dives. Source 2 is at least 5 years away. Valve are still supporting TF2, Dota2, CS GO and portal 2 on source, they aren't going to develop a whole other engine alongside that.

If you want to jump ship and move to UDK there's no downside to it. I have no idea why I prefer source - it's temperamental, hard to work with, valve keeps breaking it - but I just do, so I'll keep fiddling with it. Having said that, there's no harm in fiddling with both, I model for both UDK and source.

[Xanthi]

Well I wish these so called gamedesign schools had a bit more knowledge. In the end it doesnt matter with what engine your working with it's all about the result. When your done with university your probably going to work in a game studio. And in most of the studios you don't have much control over the engine they're using.

Source is still a very good engine to start with for the simple fact that you know more about what's really happening inside and why certain things give different outcomes. And that will help you with solving problems in whatever engine.
I don't say stick forever with source but create a few levels and move on to UDK or any modern engine. Best is to learn a bit of them all and become master in one. Game studios these days like people that are flexible. Our studio started with Source engine but for our current project we're using Unity and maybe after that we move to UDK who knows. Depends all on which goals we want to achieve and budget of course

[mazman34340]

Thanks for the advice guys.

I go to the Savannah College of Art and Design by the way, sophomore. I want to create a portfolio worthy piece. I chose Hammer first because of the large user base. The Operation Payback also seems interesting in Global Offensive.

Nice to know there are designer in here by the way.

[Epifire]

If you want to jump ship and move to UDK there's no downside to it. I have no idea why I prefer source - it's temperamental, hard to work with, valve keeps breaking it - but I just do, so I'll keep fiddling with it. Having said that, there's no harm in fiddling with both, I model for both UDK and source.

^Yeah I'm kinda running with this strategy right here^

Source is definitely a fun old engine to work with and isn't so blasted hard like some of the other ones Arma mentioned (I never modded Thief but the DromEd community gave me some insight on how difficult it was). Source is renowned enough that if you have a lot of experience in it that is not a bad thing to have on a record. Unreal, Crytek and Unity are others but yeah other people covered that so just keep learning and designing stuff.

Biggest point of advice I can give is to find out what you like best and are most comfortable with. Then start working on simple projects and scale them up over time when you are able to take on more. There is nothing more depressing then having a ton of unfinished projects that were too grand to complete. Even if it's extremely simple, just getting into the habit of finishing what you start is something that future companies will like to see on a portfolio. Oddly enough it also is good for increasing personal confidence as well as your resolve for later projects.

[Gambini]

UDK is far and away superior to source, no one is going to debate that.

I will. I can count the good mods finished with UDK with my hand. Source has the biggest mod base and that´s because it´s effective. It may not use the top notch technology but comes with a base to work with, and that´s where all other projects for other engines seem to get stuck at. I´m sick of reading people saying that UDK is better but never shipping anything with it.

try learning the Build Engine for Duke3D

Build engine was the first level editor WYGIWYS and after almost two decades levels, indy games and mods seem to fall from the trees.

[Jangalomph]

Just because some more things have come out of source doesn't mean its better. UDK has a far superior tool set, and way less hassle.

[nub]

Hammer itself is pretty simple to use once you get the basics down. I still haven't found a 3D app with better camera controls...

As for custom assets, it's definitely tedious to import and compile to Source, but you get the hang of it eventually. All I can say is, use 3rd party GUI apps for compiling models. Others may disagree, but GUIStudioMDL is a great program for compiling your models for Source. You don't have to use command line shit to get a cardboard box in to your mod.

Also, VMT is really freaking easy. Maybe not super technical shader parameters, but getting general textures in to Source is a breeze once you get the basics down. I haven't done any custom texture work in a year or so and I'd still be able to open up Notepad and write up a simple Lightmapped Generic texture from scratch without any references.

[Dr. Delta]

I've been interning for a while now and the only thing I keep hearing from the guys who are porting their UE3 project (not UDK) to Playstation is that it's really -fucking- annoying to work with. Kismet and the physics engine work differently on the PS3, when there's an engine update shit just breaks. Have fun finding out your kismet broke, or they're using a different physics engine implementation now and you have to re-do all the physics code and shit. Want your content to fully load and not have popping textures/etc., pause your kismet after loading your level - no, Source might have its quirks, but it works.

[Sathor]

Anyone can create a few rooms with textures and props in Hammer in a matter of 2 hours. With AI or playable in Multiplayer.
I want to see that done in UDK or Cry without doing custom models etc.

Plus, once you set up a good system for importing models, it is easy in Source too:

3DS Max Export as SMD - SMDs are saved into modelsrc folder
Copy qc template which has to correct paths already set, just change the mdl and smd name and set up stuff
Use a BAT file
Convert the material files with VTF Edit and create the VMT, again with templates

A matter of 2 minutes, if you have done it before.

[kraid]

Every engine has it's strengths and weaknesses.
On UDK i dislike the seams issue. (smoothing will split based on the border of UV islands)
Even the models comming with the UDK have this issue.
So either you map your UVs in a way that allows you to hide the seams, or you have to multiply a detail normalmap onto your regular one, which makes them less noticable.

Also working with brush based geometry is a pain in the ass in UDK compared to Hammer.