Zainstaluj Steam
zaloguj się
|
język
简体中文 (chiński uproszczony)
繁體中文 (chiński tradycyjny)
日本語 (japoński)
한국어 (koreański)
ไทย (tajski)
български (bułgarski)
Čeština (czeski)
Dansk (duński)
Deutsch (niemiecki)
English (angielski)
Español – España (hiszpański)
Español – Latinoamérica (hiszpański latynoamerykański)
Ελληνικά (grecki)
Français (francuski)
Italiano (włoski)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonezyjski)
Magyar (węgierski)
Nederlands (niderlandzki)
Norsk (norweski)
Português (portugalski – Portugalia)
Português – Brasil (portugalski brazylijski)
Română (rumuński)
Русский (rosyjski)
Suomi (fiński)
Svenska (szwedzki)
Türkçe (turecki)
Tiếng Việt (wietnamski)
Українська (ukraiński)
Zgłoś problem z tłumaczeniem
I'm not saying that I only like it when everything is rectangular and at right angles, but I prefer it when the map mainly has lines aligned on the grid and moves away from that just for a few sections, like Mirage CT to A, Overpass middle/bathrooms and the T route to B, Inferno banana... do you agree that it has benefits? For me it's easier to understand the entire layout when I know which parts run in parallel. Really curious what you think about this though.
Anyway, sorry for rambling, I want to repeat that I really enjoy this map! And by the way, de_shift is still my number 1 layout that I wish got an HD upgrade and a permanent place in the game haha
In my opinion, I think map layouts are easier to grasp if you can understand where things are placed on the underlying grid, and when lines are parallel to each other. If you have a lot of right angles, it's clearer where paths are relative to each other. T apps totally throws that off, but there's also the entire B side of the map where very few significant lines run parallel to the axes. I don't know if axis alignment is something that mappers are trying to avoid, but I think a certain amount of it is useful to make the map easy to grasp, especially since most CSGO maps work like that. (...)