Temple of Osiris
1 on 1 players | Reviewed by DaZ - Monday 15 January 2001 @ 02:40
Temple of Osiris is a small 1 atrium map for intense duels that involve strategy and skill. The style is Egyptian with giant sandstone walls and strange text engraved into the trim. Dave Bulow has also created a few custom textures of which only 1 I liked. This was the floor texture, the others he made were screenshots of some of the Quake monsters from iD's maps with a simple crumpled paper effect applied t
o them.
The map plays well as a duel map and item placement is good with no areas being superior to others. The rocket launcher is at the very top of the map in a long hallway that connects one side of the map to the other, below this corridor there is the only armour which is a dead giveaway to your position when you grab it.
Teleporters connect the very bottom level with the start of the long corridor at both ends and this greatly aids connectivity. All in all not the best duel map I have played but a solid map that will entertain for a while...
3.0 out of 5.0
Download 943Kb | readme | Dave Bulow | http://www.planetquake.com/davebulow
# 1. b0? ^
by Drannerz - Monday 15 January 2001 @ 03:40
er...DaZ
So that's why you've been giving me loads of reviews to do for Religion quake...You're cheating on me with Paul.
Well fine...see if I care...BUT IF WE BREAK UP [tear rolls down cheak] I'M TAKING CUSTODY OF THE D.D.L.C. LOGO...[sob]
# 2. Always so harsh? ^
by Jay - Monday 15 January 2001 @ 05:15
I'm waiting for the day that Daz gives someone else's map a better review than one of his own..
The point is to "sell" these maps so that people download them, bro.
# 3. Errrr... ^
by DaZ - Monday 15 January 2001 @ 06:14
Ok, a few points. I have never reviewed any of my own maps. In fact I dont think ANYONE has ever reviewed there own maps. Secondly, I do give maps a good review if they deserve it. Have a look at Religion Quakes EFDM12 review and you will see what I mean. And about selling the maps, this map is an alright map (hence the 3 score) but nothing really reached out and grabbed me about it (in a good way) so I could only mention the things that looked a little odd, like the slightly dodgy textures. But it is a very fun map to play... Get it :)
# 4. I did ^
by mal - Tuesday 16 January 2001 @ 01:12
I reviewed one of my own maps. it r000000led. it was s000 l337!
heh, now that I look back at it, it blew large chunks. ask shamb. he was the only one who saw it. Killjoy too, but Shamb semi-reviewed it. He was alot nicer about it than he should have been.
I disagree with Jay.
The point is not to sell the maps. if the map fucking blows, then it gets a bad score.
The idea is to save the public from bad maps. the idea is to give a fair rating of a map as a reflection of its quality. take a look at the review of one of my maps in here. it sucks, and for this reason has been been given a bad score. it was created carelessly in less than a day and for this reason, not alot of attention was given to it and it is crud. Because of this, it was given a score of 2.5. I am glad it was given a poor score because it prompted me to give more thought to maps and spend more time developing them. (Instead of just churning em out like I thought I was rocketman or something.) by getting a bad score, mappers are encouraged to go look at the 'score 5' maps and study what good maps are about. they put thought into flow and visuals and realise that doorways should be more than 4 units wide and plain, straight, hallways no longer than 32,000. ;)
# 5. Cranky Drannerz rolls a ph4t one ^
by Drannerz - Tuesday 16 January 2001 @ 02:17
What the fuck is Jay on about. DaZ isn't harsh, he's bloody generous. Go look at the reviews at Religion Quake...He gave Oandu 90%.
-Drannerz
# 6. jeez :) ^
by Fern - Tuesday 16 January 2001 @ 06:20
256mb of RAM and I still get the RAM icon. are the textures resized? they look it :)
# 7. We already had this discussion ^
by GrindSpire - Wednesday 17 January 2001 @ 02:59
When I 'slightly' knocked SaTaNiX's map. Go read the comments there.
# 8. BTW ^
by mal - Wednesday 17 January 2001 @ 09:21
in my post I said "if the map fucking blows, then it gets a bad score."
I would just like to note that I am not insinuating that this particular map blows (unlike maldm1). I have not played this map and will therefore reserve judgement until I have done so.
# 9. the only prob i see..... ^
by Seth - Wednesday 17 January 2001 @ 09:39
is that the rating doesnt reflect the overall impression of the map given by the review, especially when u go on to say this:
"But it is a very fun map to play... Get it :)"
in ur comment above... if its that much fun surely it should get more? mayb it doesnt look great or nothin 'jumps out' at u, but that doesnt make it worse... 3 suggests thge map is average, whereas ur review suggests its good....
# 10. Yikes.. ^
by Jay - Thursday 18 January 2001 @ 09:52
I thought you guys would keep a somewhat professional manner about this..
At any rate, Daz, I've read just about every review you've ever done (I frequent your site, I've even sent you quite a bit of mail - I'm the guy that corrected you when you had Jeff McWhorter's maps under another authors name), and I've got to say that you come off as kindof a snob in a lot of them. This wouldn't bother me one bit if you were a professional level designer yourself, but I've seen you slam a lot of levels that I personally find much more enjoyable that your own (and I've got every one of them).
I think that people would give your reviews a little more heed if you were slightly more positive. That is all. As of late, if I see that you dissed a map, I still download it because I'm aware that you're usually overly judemental..
Try not to get too upset. A critic who can't take criticism looks like a baby.
# 11. Woops.. ^
by Jay - Thursday 18 January 2001 @ 09:55
That last comment was more for Drannerz. No disrespect, Daz.
# 12. Hmmmm... ^
by DaZ - Thursday 18 January 2001 @ 12:03
Yeah ok, I'm always willing to hear other people comments, but I stand by my review, and as it is only my opinion then it doesn't mean that everyone will agree with it. I geuss thats another reason why this comments bit is here, so that you can hear other peoples comments... Maybe I am a little harsh on reviews but if (for me) the map has nothing fundamentally original or eyecatching to it then it doesn't hold my interrest as long as a map with a wicked design and great playability would...
# 13. Read the comments on the author's site... ^
by XeNoN - Thursday 18 January 2001 @ 02:36
"Use GLQuake! Not WinQuake or God Forbid the original quake.exe"
If you do use either of the latter, then you'll get slowdown; ALL the textures are on a scale: 0.5,0.5.
# 14. You make a good point.. ^
by Jay - Thursday 18 January 2001 @ 03:42
and I agree. I suppose my original remark was also in reply to your reviews of Plutonium's maps. You really cut him no slack, and when I saw this not-so-enthusiastic review and an opportunity to voice my opinion, I took it.
I guess I would use a different approach to encourage map makers to strive. Constructive criticism is better than brute honesty in my book, but you call them like you see them.
# 15. (sorry, couldn't think of a title) ^
by Drannerz - Friday 19 January 2001 @ 03:31
It's wierd the way we all get so worked up about something which to most of us doesn't affect the major or important aspects of our lives. You'd think I'd be more passionate about where my unpredictable future is leading me, or where the fuck all my money keeps going.
Oh well...RAH RAH...GRUMBLE, MOAN, DIS'...RAH...
-Drannerz
