Quote from msleeper on September 28, 2010, 5:56 pm

New spotlight!

I had to watch they very first part of the video to get me going in the right direction, but once I saw that I kind of "got" what you were trying to do. I went a really roundabout way getting the CC out of the main puzzle area but it was more or less the same I think. Really great map, and like I said on the news page, deceptively simple.

Oh and [spoiler]I found both the cakes[/spoiler].

Quote from p0rtalplayer on September 28, 2010, 7:01 pm

This map was pretty awesome. Well made and quite difficult. Unlike all these 3p1c n00bs (jk) I didn't have to use a walkthrough, just trial and error, to solve the puzzles. I like this map and I liked portal pro, keep up the good work

Quote from yohoat9 on September 28, 2010, 8:06 pm

Quote:

I went a really roundabout way getting the CC out of the main puzzle area but it was more or less the same I think.

Me too, I can't remember how I got it through, but I did a more complex way then was required, I felt so dumb when I saw the walkthrough, and I agree, such a simple solution, but the map is made in such a way that u feel completely clueless half of the time

Quote from youme on September 29, 2010, 5:26 pm

Finished it, got [spoiler]both cakes[/spoiler].

I had to peak a little bit at the walkthrough because the speeds of the platforms was just fast enough for me to think I could do it a different way with ninja timing. That threw me off.

I felt the companion cube was totally redundant, if you lost it you just got another which totally destroys the point of making it a companion cube. It should have just been a normal cube since the only thing special about it was the incineration at the end, which was not really all that well justified and I was told to incinerate the cube about 60 seconds after getting the damn thing and being told to look after it. I did a lot of cube swaping too, realising halfway through something I'd realise i'd got the wrong cube on the pad, but if I emancipated the WCC I'd just get given another one..IMHO you should just totally remove everything to do with it being a WCC and just make it a normal cube because it was just a total waste and only acts to water down any proper WCC levels. (ie use it when you need to, not when you can)

Quote from msleeper on September 29, 2010, 5:36 pm

I'm pretty sure it was only a CC because of the scoring system in the contest they had, but I agree with you entirely that it was extremely arbitrary.

Quote from Nightgunner5 on September 29, 2010, 5:39 pm

youme wrote:

Finished it, got [spoiler]both cakes[/spoiler].

I had to peak a little bit at the walkthrough because the speeds of the platforms was just fast enough for me to think I could do it a different way with ninja timing. That threw me off.

[spoiler]I felt the companion cube was totally redundant, if you lost it you just got another which totally destroys the point of making it a companion cube. It should have just been a normal cube since the only thing special about it was the incineration at the end, which was not really all that well justified and I was told to incinerate the cube about 60 seconds after getting the damn thing and being told to look after it. I did a lot of cube swaping too, realising halfway through something I'd realise i'd got the wrong cube on the pad, but if I emancipated the WCC I'd just get given another one..IMHO you should just totally remove everything to do with it being a WCC and just make it a normal cube because it was just a total waste and only acts to water down any proper WCC levels. (ie use it when you need to, not when you can)[/spoiler]

I agree in the fact that [spoiler]the weighted companion cube should not have been "refundable"[/spoiler]. However, I noticed a lot of [spoiler]fizzlers using a non-standard particle effect[/spoiler]. I'm thinking that they were meant to [spoiler]not affect the WCC[/spoiler]. I'd like to see some way of preventing [spoiler]Cindy[/spoiler] from [spoiler]being fizzled[/spoiler], such as [spoiler]func_clip_vphysics[/spoiler] around the [spoiler]standard fizzlers[/spoiler].

Overall, it's an [spoiler]awesome[/spoiler] map, but with a few [spoiler](see above)[/spoiler] that need to be [spoiler]fixed[/spoiler].

msleeper wrote:

I'm pretty sure it was only a [spoiler]CC[/spoiler] because of the scoring system in the contest they had, but I agree with you entirely that it was extremely arbitrary.

The idea of [spoiler]incinerating a cube[/spoiler] wouldn't make sense with [spoiler]a[/spoiler] normal [spoiler]weighted storage cube[/spoiler].

Quote from msleeper on September 29, 2010, 5:49 pm

Yeah what I [spoiler]mean[/spoiler] is that whole CC [spoiler]+[/spoiler] incinerator concept should have been [spoiler]scrapped[/spoiler], and it seems like it [spoiler]only[/spoiler] exists to pad points in [spoiler]the[/spoiler] contest.

Also, easy on the spoiler tags there killer. Or try using bigspoiler.

Quote from youme on September 29, 2010, 9:22 pm

Ah, I was unaware of any special prerequisites regarding the presence of a WCC.

I didn't notice any non-standard fizzlers though, where were they? [spoiler]the small square ones with the raising buttons just had four particle effects close and at different angles, that's possibly why they looked different[/spoiler]

Overall the complexity of the puzzle was about right for me, it was just hindered by all the [spoiler]getting the right cube[/spoiler] which actually didn't matter at all.

I also noticed a few unorthodoxies: [spoiler]The unstationary platform beams (and ends) kill you which I found quite annoying, what looked like an easy jump to the other side became a
quick death.[/spoiler] There are never any slanted tiles in portal except a few chamfered corners, but near the [spoiler]outside cake[/spoiler] there are a few which felt odd.

Just a niggle: The two unstationary platforms, when they were in the 'home' position, I'd have liked to be able to run straight over them but there was a gap on one side which I felt was just a little bit of an unnecessary death hazard. (I have strong opinions on death as a punishment in games)

Also, I'm tearing it down cause it was good, don't forget that

Quote from Mevious on September 29, 2010, 9:34 pm

Thanks for the suggestions regarding the WCC, but I am not convinced that it should be changed. And no, it wasn't added just to get points for the contest, but that helped. The fact that you can destroy the WCC and get a replacement was planned from the start. What do you think the name of the map is referring to?

There are many reasons why I used the WCC rather than another normal cube.
1. You can tell the two cubes apart.
2. The intended solution [spoiler]requires you to destroy the normal cube while keeping the WCC alive. This forces you to think about which cube to use for what, and it adds depth to the puzzle.[/spoiler]
3. Part of the puzzle is to get that specific cube to the incinerator room. If it was just a button, then either cube should work, it can't be two buttons because then it would be impossible, and if it wasn't a WCC, the incinerator wouldn't make much sense.
4. Most of the dialog plays off of the original WCC dialog from the game. It provides an excuse for glados to say some ironic stuff, like telling the player to take care of it just so that it can be properly incinerated later.
5. The incinerator is a great excuse to make a cool fire room.

I could have added another type of cube so that the player could tell them apart, but that new mechanic would require extra training and explanation at the beginning of the map. Why would I do that when the WCC skin conjures all of the expectations and associations I want the player to have? (e.g., Try not to kill it until you get it to a certain point, it is more important than the other cube, only it can activate the exit door, etc.)

youme wrote:

if you lost it you just got another which totally destroys the point of making it a companion cube

I don't think it totally destroys the point, it's just a minor difference. In my opinion the WCC should be about more than just bringing it through a set of puzzles without being allowed to destroy it. In this map the player gets punished for destroying the WCC early. If he does, he must stop what he is doing and go get another, or load. At the same time, the intended solution [spoiler]requires that you destroy the normal cube.[/spoiler] There is a drastic difference between the two cubes, because of where they are dropped, that I want the player to realize. I too am annoyed when a map has a WCC just for the sake of having it, but I think this map uses the WCC concept well (even if it is a little different than how the original game uses it).

Nightgunner5 wrote:

I'm thinking that [the fizzlers] were meant to not affect the WCC. I'd like to see some way of preventing Cindy from being fizzled, such as func_clip_vphysics around the standard fizzlers.

If I were to add invisible walls to all the fizzlers so that only the WCC couldn't pass and invisible floors so you couldn't drop the cube into the liquid, that would be more arbitrary and exploitable than getting a replacement. I don't like to use invisible walls as a solution because I get frustrated myself when I encounter something like that in a custom map.

Tl;dr: Yes, it is odd that you can destroy the companion cube and get a replacement, but it serves other purposes in the map.

youme wrote:

it was just hindered by all the [spoiler]getting the right cube[/spoiler] which actually didn't matter at all.

As I was writing this, I saw this post. If it didn't matter which cube you used for certain things then you probably have found an alternate solution. In this case I can see how the WCC would feel unnecessary. Can you explain further?