This thread is kinda like going to a star trek convention and asking if people prefer star wars

if they can fix weather fps and add crosshair outlines to default crosshairs I don't see a reason why there can't be snow

Snowy maps are annoying to look at. They're a damn strain on the eyes

I prefer snow because that's the arena they have on mge

http://www.colorcombos.com/images/colors/0099FF.png

should be the main color of snow in tf2 but until then sun most definate

Some maps look good with snow. Viaduct isn't one of them.

Moot point until Valve solves the snow fps issues.

http://i.imgur.com/mVHPo8l.png

?

e: eat it dancenumber

ur crazy #6

http://i.imgur.com/PlIe1ZO.jpg

e: 9 second difference lmao

damn thats one hell of a ninja jarateking lmao

It snows blue icee where I live so good choice

http://strawpoll.me/6619756
tftv said that they would change games if the community really wanted it.
I know its kinda trivial but I am interested in peoples opinions on this subject.

What? Viaduct was obviously made for snow, because several map design choices only make sense with snow, e.g. very slanted roofs, spruce trees, logs half-buried in the ground.

I don't really think reskinning a map is what Valve means when they say they want to adjust their maps for competitive play. Adding the connector would be an example of a meaningful and plausible development.

thats actually dope like an ice palace

It may not be what they have in mind but it is also true that, regardless of looks in the sense of aesthetics and being generally visually pleasant, snow maps are generally less suitable as competitive maps because of the associated FPS issues and, bluntly, the fact that staring at pure white for a whole match is more of a strain on the eyes for a lot of people (myself included) than staring at greens and blues. Because of that I definitely think it's worth discussing.

With that said, it is true that it's probably not what they initially have in mind, and that adding connector, the reshaping of China and so on are much more necessary and much more plausible changes.

http://i.imgur.com/AvvAaIX.png

I think snow is a nice changeup from the usual themes but it needs some changes.
The snow is WAY to bright. They could make it more blue/greyish and use a night skybox and it would look pretty sick but not be as straining on the eyes. Allso they need to make a way to disable the extra particle effects because they murder FPS on some systems.

As it stands i prefer grass.

*drops*

i would play on this map even with a 100 fps drop

see the icy performance-murdering reflections for a tactical advantage

the main issue with snow comes in the fact that very little of the snow itself is friendly to depth perception. compare and contrast:

http://comp.tf/images/5/5a/Badlands_Second.jpg

ol' reliable badlands spire. despite having quite a lot of different kinds of areas to walk/jump/strafe around, mostly using the same overall color, the texture differences still let you know the depth of every area, from the jaggedness of the spire itself to the cliff textures around trash showing even the slightest change in height.

https://wiki.teamfortress.com/w/images/2/24/Viaduct_house.jpg

on the flipside, if you never played viaduct before and you looked at this, the depth is a lot less obvious. the game tries its damnest to muddy up the snow as much as feasibly possible but even then you're not getting too much of a precise idea on the way slopes are angled, which would be less of a deal if the entire map wasn't very much built around being a hilly slope

okay, figured you guys would like some insight from the makers of product.

While the snowy to grassy change is the most obvious one visually, it is by far the most trivial thing in product's development. The snowy/grassy debate should not be a point of focus in the viaduct discussion if product is to be taken seriously. First thing you guys need to consider: viaduct is not symmetrical, far from it actually. product is symmetrical (or at least everything that has a collision is). viaduct probably looks fine but there's a lot more than meets the eye. It may not look like much, but product has been refined to a point where it would be silly for valve to think that they should try to catch up to it. Valve certainly has the resources to do it but getting it to a viable competitive map is an undertaking that I'm afraid might be underestimated. From dealing with community requests, I'll tell you straight up, you guys are very demanding and a part of me is doubtful that Valve will commit to the same level of attention to detail. It took a lot of work to make product near perfect, but we got there.

I'll be honest, me and bubblebobber are not too sure what to think of all this. Of course we'd like to work with valve to make sure the future matchmaking viaduct is not a bad compromise that lessens the MM experience but it's looking like they are not currently interested in our proposition. It might just be that it's too soon to discuss maps since mm is still in early development but word on the street is that pro maps are a no-go. Maybe we need to build a comprehensive changelog of viaduct>product to make the disparity clearer and by doing that, making product's offering more convincing.

Those are my thoughts basically.
This is somewhere you can support product http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=454272353
and yeah, that's that.