UESPWiki talk:Morrowind Redesign Project

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995

Jump to: navigation, search
Related Discussions
Archives

Contents

[edit] Pages Nominated for Deletion

  • None currently


[edit] Map Image Standards

I was about to add a bunch of images to some places, but I'm now trying to find out if there is a standard somewhere for maps of places.

My questions are as follows:

  • Do we have a maximum dimension limit for images (i.e. 300width)
  • What is the standard font and font size being used for maps? (Arial? Times? Helvetica?)
  • Is there a standard for font colors on labeling? I've seen different colors on different images...

I've checked out some other images and I have a general idea on what to do, but I'm just wondering if there is some official word out there, and if there isn't then perhaps we should try and create some kind of standard.

Just trying to be consistent with the rest of the site! Thanks. --Cdevine 16:01, 30 November 2006 (EST)

We don't have any established standards, and we could use some. I've been trying to title the map pages in Green colored font, with yellow used for map labels such as doorways and locations of significant items. Some of the maps have been pulled over from the old UESP site, and thay may be some of the differences you are seeing (trying to leverage what's already in existence until we can provide something better). I've been using Times New Roman font for all map labeling, with the map titles in 14pt font, and the labels themselves in 10pt font. If you'd like to take the lead and develop some image standards for the group to use, please feel free to do that; when we reach concensus on the standards, we can post them on the project page.--Hoggwild5 16:45, 30 November 2006 (EST)
Stting a standard for maps is really important, especially if there will be many people uploading files. I think that we should try to follow the standard of the maps have been pulled over from the old UESP site, which you can find mostly on the Main Quest pages. When we have set the standard, we'll have torevise all uploaded maps to date. --DrPhoton 03:24, 1 December 2006 (EST)
I don't know what font size, or font typeface was used on the old maps. If you have any idea, please let us know. I've taken a stab at outlining some Map image standards on the Project page...if anyone has any commentary or would like to see changes on the image standards I've outlined, please list them here (try to provide commentary over the next 7 days so we can fine tune the standards before moving forward).--Hoggwild5 07:54, 1 December 2006 (EST)
The style we should follow is that of Image:Kogoruhn.jpg. It is very well done! Its features are:
  • Different sections/levels are connected with smooth purple lines.
  • Each section is labelled with Arial white font. Size? Bold?
  • Monsters and items are placed on the map as colored symbols, which are explained in a legend box. Any important monster/item can be individually labelled on the map.
  • Brackground is solid black.
  • There is no general title, i.e. Kogoruhn Interior Map, as this can be included in the caption of the thumbnail or the summary of the image file.
This is the perfect map for my standards. Notice that it clashes with some of the rules you've just set up. --DrPhoton 08:59, 1 December 2006 (EST)
I don't disagree -- I like this map as well. The problem as I see it is identifying the coloring used for the colored fonts, and the size of the typeface. Also, I'm not exactly certain that this map is labeled with Arial font; I've tried to duplicate the labels using a variety of typefaces and have been unable to do so, but Arial Bold was the closest I could come to this typeface. Finally, I guess I don't possess the tools or the expertise to create these types of images (I have spent countless hours working on this and my maps look like crap), so I am abandoning the creation of internal maps and leaving them to others with better tools and skills that I have. (sigh)
By the way, if the original author of the Kogoruhn Interior Map is around, we would appreciate your input.--Hoggwild5 09:12, 1 December 2006 (EST)
I'm not sure we should be too strict about it. For example, if you enforce a font color as you have, what if it doesn't show up well on certain maps? The example I ran into is Bloodmoon maps, where the caves are Ice (white). White text is obviously not going to work. Here is my attempt to match the kogoruhn.jpg map. How is this one? Bloodmoon:Gronn. --Sstasino 13:18, 1 December 2006 (EST)
Good job! Just a couple of things: "Berserker" is misspelled, and there's no need to label entrances, since they are the only doors not connected to other sections. Using different colors when necessary is OK, or you can either use shadowed text. Another thing, try softening the edges of the symbols and text a little. --DrPhoton 13:54, 2 December 2006 (EST)
Doh! Shave my head, add 100lbs and call me Homer... You are right! I will have to step up the tool I use from Paint to The Gimp to soften the edges, but I think it will be worth it. I will update another version soon. If I can get this working like clockwork, I'll crank out some more. With a standard to follow, it makes these things so much easier to do en masse. --Sstasino 23:28, 3 December 2006 (EST)

Since I've not been having too much luck creating internal maps that look like anything, I thought I'd make it easier for anyone interested to use the data I've already gathered. I've uploaded the original .bmp screenshots of each dungeon map to my personal ftp server, and included a link on the project page for anyone interested in leveraging what I've already gathered.--Hoggwild5 21:42, 1 December 2006 (EST)

New update -- just acquired Adobe Photoshop, plus I finally figured out how to get better looking maps from the construction set than you can get from screenprints in the game, so I'm back to editing maps :). I'd like to accelerate concensus on the mapping standards so we can move forward and get some decent looking maps posted to the wiki. I'd like to propose that we finalize the standards by the end of the week, and will be putting a finalization date on the project page. --Hoggwild5 06:27, 4 December 2006 (EST)
For those of us (me included) who are deficient in the use of the Elder Scrolls Construction Set for Morrowind, I've put together a tutorial for getting image maps from the construction set. Hopefully this will save others from much frustration, trial and error. A link to the tutorial can be found on the main project page. Let me know if you have any questions.--Hoggwild5 10:35, 4 December 2006 (EST)
Guinea Pig Ok I have followed your tutorial on how to use the CS to get maps, and the instructions provided on the Project Page for map standards. (note that the Image:kogoruhn.jpg map example doesn't follow the standard as published). Here is my latest attempt Image:MWM-Gronn.jpg. In the tutorial, you suggested maximizing the size of the map. Since this picture is so large, I had to reduce quality greatly to get it to 100K, which is still 80k too large. In this case, perhaps a image size limit of 800x600 or something similar should be put in place. DrPhoton, Hoggwild5, please comment. --Sstasino 12:38, 4 December 2006 (EST)
Hi, Sstasino -- thanks for being a guinea pig on the tutorial. I've looked at the map you uploaded, and I personally think it's a bit blurry. This is probably due to the fact that you reduced the quality of the map to get it under 100K. The figure on the project page of 20K for map sizes is a guideline that I established when I was working with the screenshots obtained from inside the game; my experience at the time was that images that were larger than 20K were not necessarily improved when the image came from screenshots taken inside the game. The maps from the construction set are more detailed and more vivid than anything from inside the game, and will as a result generate files of a larger size than what we currently have listed on the project page as a guideline; as a result, that figure will need to be adjusted upward. In addition, the figure on the project page is just a guideline (to prevent someone from submitting a HUGE image when there's no benefit to it). I think in the case of the map you selected, the image will need to be bigger to preserve the quality of the map, and that's fine -- we just don't want to get a bunch of unnecessarily large uploaded images. So, use your discretion and adjust the quality of the image upward until it's no longer blurry, and re-upload. If you need some help with this, let us know. --Hoggwild5 12:51, 4 December 2006 (EST)
Sstasino -- I think the image is a bit too big for such a simple cave, and also blurry. Make it smaller (1/2 - 1/3 the size) and improve the quality.
Agreed. That was my feeling also. --Sstasino 11:42, 5 December 2006 (EST)
Hoggwild5 -- There is a problem using the CS for the maps: whatever hangs from the ceiling in a cell obstructs what lies below, e.g. stalactites or rocks in caves, or wooden beams in houses. Also, the walls and columns (or any objects with height) will appear in perspective (see e.g. Kogoruhn, Hall of Maki). In my opinion, it is probably better to use the screenshots, though we'll have to find a way of getting rid of the player marker (maybe with two images). --DrPhoton 15:22, 4 December 2006 (EST)
DrPhoton -- I haven't encountered any problem with ceiling objects blocking the lower views, but that may be a function of the dungeons I've worked in. The detail that is available by using the maps from within the construction set is simply not available by using the screenshots from within the game. In addition, you don't have to deal with removing the player marker from the map image. I have a personal preference on using the CS maps vs. the in-game maps because of the detail available (of course, that a personal preference, not a community concensus). Perhaps we could consider taking this on a case-by-case basis, and using the in-game screenshots in cases where the construction set maps aren't feasible? --Hoggwild5 17:53, 4 December 2006 (EST)
I haven't had issues yet with this either, but on most caves, the detail doesn't really gain you anything. If I compare the one from CS and the one I took in game for this particular cave, the screenshot one is actually a bit better, since you can tell that the first yellow dot is actually in the area under the entrance-way, and not in the ice wall, as it looks in the CS version. I think case by case will have to be the modus operandi for most of these. I also think that having the map large enough to show all areas, but small enough to limit scrolling the screen on typical resolutions (1024x768) is a good standard as well. The maps Lurlock did are like that, as well as the kogoruhn map, which btw, was screenshotted, not taken from CS. (notice the fog of war). But I will continue to try and follow the standard as published, so we can see how practical it is. --Sstasino 11:42, 5 December 2006 (EST)

[edit] Color Schema for Maps pages

DrPhoton, I tried to use the color settings you inserted on the project page to adhere to the map labeling standards, and I can't get any of the image editing software I'm using to accept the settings as you have them modified, so I've been using the R/G/B settings and accepting the defaults from the software for the Hue, Saturation and Luminescence. I'm using a combination of Microsoft Paint and Adobe Photoshop (new purchase) for the maps. (I have abandoned GIMP in favor of Adobe Photoshop as a personal preference). --Hoggwild5 06:27, 4 December 2006 (EST)

Don't know why(?) I got them from Corel PhotoPaint, but in any case the RGB colors should work fine, or just the name colors (yellow, red, blue, magenta) since they are all pure. --DrPhoton 15:22, 4 December 2006 (EST)
I found, at least while using the Gimp, setting the RGB automatically got the correct hue and saturation. --Sstasino 11:42, 5 December 2006 (EST)
Yep, Adobe Photoshop does the same thing. To eliminate confusion, I'm going to remove the Hue, Saturation and Luminescence settings from the table on the project page.--Hoggwild5 13:40, 5 December 2006 (EST)

[edit] Restart

Okay well I hadn't realised there were so many dud maps before I started putting tags on the pages. I'm going to stop for now - I've already flooded the Recent Changes page enough - but the rest need doing too. I've been working through Category:Morrowind-Places - so far I've done Ascadian Isles, Ashlands, Azura's Coast and Bitter Coast. Once all the tags are on I guess it's time to start actually making the maps... –Rpeh•T•C•E• 16:45, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

Before restarting the map creation process for Morrowind, I think there are a few questions to sort out, most of which can be summarized as "do we want the Morrowind maps to be more similar to the Oblivion maps?" In general, I prefer several of the options chosen for the Oblivion maps (in part because I pushed for several of those changes). Specific questions that have crossed my mind are:
  • Do we want to take maps from the construction set or from in-game screenshots? In-game screenshots have the advantages that north is always up, that there is a standard resolution for the maps, and that they are more directly related to what a player sees in game.
  • Do we want to combine all the different levels on a single map (e.g., Image:MW-Arkngthand.jpg), or have only one zone per map (e.g, Oblivion:Sancre Tor)? If it were possible to line up the different zones so that the combined map was relatively seamless, e.g., so all the yellow/purple connecting lines weren't needed, then I could see the combined map making more sense. But as it stands, I don't see too many advantages to the combined map. It seems harder to figure out what is where (e.g., the extra labels necessary to show the two different parts of the Cells of Hollow Hand). The map ends up being thumbnailed to such a small size that it's of no use unless you pull up the full version of the image.
  • Do we want to encourage maps to be shrunk in size before uploading (per the current standards)? The reasons given aren't really concerns: we have tons of disk space set aside for images; the images are viewed as thumbnails on most pages and therefore the bandwidth is usually the same no matter what the full image's resolution may be.
  • Do we want to stick with the existing recommended MW legend? Or should it be tweaked? Given the dark background of Morrowind maps, the standards perhaps shouldn't be identical to Oblivion maps; on the other hand, it may simply be sufficient to switch to white text instead of black text. One specific issue that I have with the current MW standard is the recommendation to use different colours for NPCs vs creatures: I don't think that the difference between NPCs and creatures is important enough to require different colours; I also don't see blue being used for creatues on the examples I've looked at.
  • Do we want to use automatically-generated overlays to help produce the MW maps? I've been basically assuming that we'd go that route eventually, but it does need to be discussed by the community. Choosing to use overlays does not automatically mean that the overlays have to be identical to the Oblivion overlays: most of the details can be tweaked. There are some limitations which can't really be fixed (e.g., positioning labels in ideal locations is basically impossible). But those limitations are inherent to any type of automation and can, if necessary, be fixed manually when a person assembles the maps. There is some work required before any MW overlays will be possible. But I don't want to start that work unless it's going to be needed. And choosing to use overlays will determine the priorities of other map-related tasks in the meantime.
I'm sure there are a lot more details that will need to be discussed. But I think this contains some of the first-order questions that need to be determined before we can get to the details. --NepheleTalk 18:03, 20 May 2008 (EDT)
Starting in reverse order, my thoughts:
  • Automated overlays are preferred, they give consistency and help with the sheer number of maps needing creation.
  • Color scheme: White text for all text,
    • Bullets Green for Treasure, Red for all hostile NPC and creatures, Blue for non-hostile, Purple for corpses, MW gold squares for doors (marked with white text, e.g. Bal Ur, Shrine).
  • Map size as practical for automated creation.
  • One map per zone, no combination of maps, no purple lines for connecting areas. Too complicated and not useful, white text markers serve the same function better and easier.
  • Screen shot vs CS maps- hmm, whatever is most consistent and easy to create and combine with overlays. CS maps will have a better chance to get done, given the existing man-power.
Glad that we're taking this on now, the dungeons are generally not complicated, but the color-coded legend will help gameplay tremendously. Let me know how I can help.--Benould•T•C 15:22, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Suggested change of placement of the People table, in Places

Moved here instead, from DrPhoton's talk:

I'd like to propose a change in placement of elements in the Places category. Here's why:

While doing all this cleanup work I noticed that the people table is often filling the screen, and at least at first glance obscures valuable info in Notes and Quests. Was there ever a discussion on the order of elements? I think from a viewers standpoint and also for good design/easy read, having quests/notes above the peoples table would be preferable.

As how to implement it, maybe the bot could process it, or, if that's not possible, change it by attrition, as edits are made. Thoughts? --Benould•T•C 09:02, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Since we're now addressing all interior maps...
Suggested order:
  • Place desription
  • Main Text
  • Notes
  • Quests
  • People
Is it possible to anchor/integrate dungeon maps into the Place template? --Benould•T•C 15:35, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Inns

Do we want to group Inns together with Morrowind:Taverns or make a separate Inn page, maybe like in Oblivion:Inns? --Benould•T•C 03:48, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Time To Close This Down

I think it's time to declare this project officially "finished" and to coordinate activity through the Task List instead. At the moment, things are being listed on both pages and that's just confusing. The only major task remaining is to add the maps, and there's no need to keep a separate project page for those. Sure, there's some checking to be done and I'm sure improvements will continue for some time, but that's the same as for any other page. I'd suggest that the page be blanked but for a brief explanatory paragraph and a link to the task list, and that it be moved to a "finished" section on the Projects page. I don't think it needs to be deleted because there's a lot of information both here and on the talk page. Thoughts? –Rpeh•T•C•E• 13:15, 22 June 2008 (EDT)

It is hard to let an old friend go, but it is time to move on. I support archiving in the fashion rpeh suggested. --Benould•T•C 16:35, 22 June 2008 (EDT)
It's pretty close, but my only hesitation regarding this is that I know that Tribunal and Bloodmoon are not quite up to the level of Morrowind in terms of quality and completeness. Also, I know there's a few location pages within Morrowind which still need to be created (see the red-links on my sandbox). I say once we get those pages created, we should focus on finishing up the Expansions pages (perhaps alter this page to be Morrowind Expansion Redesign Project - though that's somewhat lengthy) before we can truly call this job "finished". --TheRealLurlock Talk 17:21, 22 June 2008 (EDT)
Pst, Lurlock, the redlinks in your sandbox are misspelled places ;) Bloodmoon is up to par with MW, a few armor/weapons pages need final details, the merchants have to be checked for item lists, but that's all, AFIK. I have not looked Tribunal over, but if it needs work, I'll be happy to help. --Benould•T•C 18:28, 22 June 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, as far as those redlinks are concerned, instead of "Akimaes Ilanipu Egg Mine" we have Akimaes-Ilanipu Egg Mine. "Almurbalarami"->Almurbalarammi, "Elith Pal Mine"->Elith-Pal Mine, "Felas Ancestral Tomb"->Falas Ancestral Tomb, "Manat Farmhouse"->Manat's Farmhouse, "Missir-Dadalit"->Missir-Dadalit Egg Mine, "Mul"->Mul Grotto, "Sterdecan's Farmhosue"->Sterdecan's Farmhouse, "Vanusanalit Egg Mine"->Vansunalit Egg Mine and "Yanemus"->Yanemus Mine. Tribunal and Bloodmoon have a few bits and bobs missing but all the NPCs, factions, quests and locations are up. I think it would be a good idea to coordinate things through one page rather than having this one as a distraction. –Rpeh•T•C•E• 00:48, 23 June 2008 (EDT)
Hmm. Well, oops on my part - I'm trying to remember where that list originally came from, as it's not like me to make that many typos on one page, so I probably copied it from the Places page at the time or something. Anyhow, my bad. I'll go ahead and correct those. I seem to recall there were still some missing pages in Bloodmoon, though, but maybe I missed them. I'll check later. --TheRealLurlock Talk 12:11, 23 June 2008 (EDT)
Okay, I stand corrected. There is, however, a good deal of work to be done on the Expansion creature and items pages to bring them up to Morrowind's level. Currently, they're mostly piled onto single pages and not very well organized in some cases. --TheRealLurlock Talk 12:53, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't think we need to declare every Morrowind, Bloodmoon, and Tribunal page perfect before we can say that the Redesign Project is complete. This is a wiki, so there will always be more edits that need to be done. But if we're talking about a few pages here and there, then it seems that standard wiki tools (cleanup tags, Task List entries) are more appropriate to keep track of the odds and ends, rather than a whole redesign project. I'd say that the project only needs to kept active as long as there are large sections of work that need coordinating and/or large-scale formatting questions that need to be answered. And most of those have been tackled here.

However, there is one area where I think some questions still need to be resolved, namely related to the format we want to use for the incomplete interior maps. I raised some questions about this earlier on the page, under Restart. If everyone is OK with Hoggwild's existing map format specifications then I'd at least like confirmation of that. If not, I think we should revise those specifications to match what we'd like to see done. And the Morrowind Redesign Project seems like the best context in which to complete that discussion. --NepheleTalk 13:13, 23 June 2008 (EDT)

Ok, I can see the maps needing attention. How about we archive the rest of the page then, so we can focus on what still needs to be done. I'll write some thoughts about image standards in a few, but generally think Hoggwild's suggestions are overly complicated. --Benould•T•C 14:06, 23 June 2008 (EDT)
Retrieved from "http://www.uesp.net/wiki/UESPWiki_talk:Morrowind_Redesign_Project"
Sponsored Links
Personal tools