We need to come to some agreement here as to the right way to do things. For many topics, like how to make a minimap, how to do a loadscreen, how to use light grids, etc, there seems to be a disconnect between the wiki that is managed by IW and this forum.

Sure, maybe the advanced mappers can get a minimap with method A, but the wiki says to use method B. So which is it? And why does one way work but not the other, yet both methods are posted? I am supposed to release my map this weekend, but I find that the closer I get to publishing it, the more problems I run into. It seems like a lot of nonartistic mappers can churn out maps every week, but those of us that aren't so script-gifted sit here and fester in our frustration.

Start really looking at tutorials as a peer group. Check it for effectiveness the first time through with no special tricks or deviations from the posted instructions. If it works, post the tutorial. If it doesn't work, don't count it as a tutorial. I followed the tutorial here for how to do a minimap. Now my map won't start because it can't find the damn map file. I look at the wiki's method, and it makes even less sense.

I know people are volunteering their time here to help and all, but if you're not really making easy and effective solutions that can be repeated by everyone every time, then you're probably doing more harm than good. And if IW frequents these boards, it's time to have a conference or discussion with them as to what constitutes "the right way".

No more confusion. No more gray areas.

Rather than the tutorials being inconsistant they are showing different methods to achieve the same goal..

IW post a few tutorials on there wiki, this is the method IW use to achieve what it is they are trying to achieve. Like yourself and many others sometimes these methods are difficult or hard to follow depending on your experience.

Many users therefore post tutorials or description of how they got things working, before you know it there are many different ways and if you read them all then you will no doubt get confused..

I can agree with what you say, sometimes i read user methods in this forum and think ''huh!? how the..'' they don't always seem like a good method or sometimes i can't even understand why something would be done a particular way..

As you get more experience with radiant you will find there will be ways you do thing that others wont, for example i tend you commonly use patches for my buildings... You won't then be so dependant on following the tutorials word for word..

Saureco writes...

You should be grateful for the time we spend; we aren't IW so we have to work out these things ourselves for other people's benefit. We have several tutorials that cover issues left by the ones at IW, but I can't see why we would all suddenly start talking to IW about their Wiki.

Saureco writes...

Well, there you are. That's why I direct people here and not to the Wiki. Tuts are always best made by the community who didn't know what they were doing before, too.

Yeah seriously the WIKI is crap except for the script reference.

And even that's wrong in several places

ModsOnline should start a Wiki.
Seriously.
Kill off the tutorial section and make a Wiki.
Just an idea.

Or keep tuts and make a Wiki

On a side note of the tuts, I think some titles should be changed as they are misleading as well as updating the tut references from COD and COD2.

Keep in mind, guys, that this isn't a flaming thread. While I have less than 20% of the posts that Novemberdobby does (and even less that most veteran moderators), I am also one of the guys contributing my time to helping newbie mappers. I, too, was a newbie at one time, but it seems like each pass of the COD mapping process gets more and more complicated (not necessarily complex). And with each pass, it seems like there is less standardization of the mapping/modding process.

Perhaps it's time that we, the members of ModsOnline, put together our own wiki for this mapping process.

If you combine the forum and tutorials you basically already have that.. But if enough of you think it's a good plan ill pass it on to foyleman, i would have thought you will need quite a few people to agree though..