Remove/recreate purple caves

[Chrome]

1 hour ago, SwitchFade said:

The idea of changing the caves is prohibitively labor intensive.

 

Due to this fact, the priority of such a change, even if the majority wanted it, places this idea squarely at 9,999,999 out of 10,000,000 in priority ranking.

 

The devs have mentioned that time resource is scarce numerous times. That RIGHT THERE makes it a norm to discuss things in the scope of said limited resource.

 

If that helps, I rephrased as well. The simple logic of it can't be dispelled by the argument that we're not allowed to make it. That's like saying only Pythagoras can use his theorem.

 

Hard no vote: I like blue caves, and I don't need to justify my likes.

 

Hard no vote: resource prohibitive.

I understand and am well aware of the time resource being scarce, you keep saying it as if that is the part i dont understand, and that is just plain wrong. 

 

while humorous your comparison is not what i am saying at all.  for example: if i were a clothing maker with limited time but the knowledge to make some really cool stuff, and if my customers all wanted a shirt with hundreds of sequins and lots of quilting in a very complicated pattern, then only i could say whether i wanted to spend the time on it or not.

 

just because one of my customers is also a clothing maker says that is way too difficult to make and I should spend time making blue T shirts instead does not mean i cant or wont make the fancy item. my customer who thinks it would take too much time is wrong.  If i as the designer decide to put the effort into that item and everyone is pleased with the result then i as the designer am happy and my customers are happy.  If on the other hand the idea of the fancy shirt never gets brought to my attention and anytime somebody brings it up it gets drowned out by it would take too much time then all i make is blue t shirts, and my customers will want the fancy shirt but settle for blue t shirts.  I would rather the ideas get put forward and let the people who are the ones doing the job decide whether or not it will be done or not.

 

and nobody says i cant just make both

 

 my customers cannot say what my priority is, only what they prefer my priority to be.

 

unless of course you are a Psychic wizard who can time travel.  

[SwitchFade]

1 hour ago, Chrome said:

I understand and am well aware of the time resource being scarce, you keep saying it as if that is the part i dont understand, and that is just plain wrong. 

 

while humorous your comparison is not what i am saying at all.  for example: if i were a clothing maker with limited time but the knowledge to make some really cool stuff, and if my customers all wanted a shirt with hundreds of sequins and lots of quilting in a very complicated pattern, then only i could say whether i wanted to spend the time on it or not.

 

just because one of my customers is also a clothing maker says that is way too difficult to make and I should spend time making blue T shirts instead does not mean i cant or wont make the fancy item. my customer who thinks it would take too much time is wrong.  If i as the designer decide to put the effort into that item and everyone is pleased with the result then i as the designer am happy and my customers are happy.  If on the other hand the idea of the fancy shirt never gets brought to my attention and anytime somebody brings it up it gets drowned out by it would take too much time then all i make is blue t shirts, and my customers will want the fancy shirt but settle for blue t shirts.  I would rather the ideas get put forward and let the people who are the ones doing the job decide whether or not it will be done or not.

 

and nobody says i cant just make both

 

 my customers cannot say what my priority is, only what they prefer my priority to be.

 

unless of course you are a Psychic wizard who can time travel.  

I'm sorry, didn't you say "I don't want to hear it from anyone but devs"?

 

You did. Further, the devs have brought up the resource themselves, validating it as a consideration of discussion. The matter being presented as a consideration from the playerbase is VALID as it indicates to the devs what they prefer the available resource be used for.

 

Your whole premise of "this is just used by naysayers" is invalid, very sorry. By voting no and that one prefers the limited resource be spent elsewhere, we're indicating out preference. Your issue with that is inconsequential, as it is a valid disposition.

 

Pointedly, you are the one advocating for a change. We're your audience, it's not our job to convince ourselves. If you're trying to persuade us, it is absolutely your burden to do so. Sorry, your argument and data are not persuasive, try again.

[Redlynne]

1 hour ago, Chrome said:

while humorous your comparison is not what i am saying at all.

Right.

What you're saying is that there are only two authoritative sources of information/opinion that you will listen to ... yourself and the dev team ... and you're already on record as saying you don't believe the dev team has said what they've said.  Everyone else is a "rando" whose word you are predisposed to reject (unless if they agree with you, go figure) ... especially if they tell you what the dev team has already said but you don't want to accept (see: reject the word of "randos" by default).

 

In other words, your mind is closed and you want people to stop telling you things you don't want to believe, no matter how true they might be, because you aren't going to believe them when they tell you the truth because it's a truth you don't want to hear/believe/accept.  However, you have (generously?) deigned to say/imply that you'll listen to people who don't speak up/post all that much (because they're devs who have better things to do than post on the forums, go figure) ... which is REALLY CONVENIENT for your position ... but when people tell you what the devs have said you don't believe them (because they're "randos").

 

Yeah ... sorry.

Credibility loss is now approaching maximal.

 

 

[Chrome]

k

Edited June 20, 2020 by Chrome

[JayboH]

9 hours ago, SwitchFade said:

The idea of changing the caves is prohibitively labor intensive.

Interesting, I assume that means any other map work would also be similar, so the possibility of new maps with new textures for any kind of brand new content will never, ever, ever happen because that would be even worse. 

 

Removing them from radio rotation - would that be easier?

[Llewellyn Blackwell]

12 hours ago, Chrome said:

 

unless of course you are a Psychic wizard who can time travel.  

Well since you are gonna bring me into this whole rambling tirade of yours. Hard no vote on changing the cave maps. Adding new ones to the rotation sure, but I am a firm fan of things like the hated cake room, water storage council room, and in general the designs of all the current cave tile sets. Hell I can pretty much consider council cells my 2nd home after all these years.

 

The entire burden of any suggestion to change or add is on the onus of the idea man. When others do not like or agree with your idea, digging in your heals, sticking your fingers in your ears, and yelling at the sky for the answer you want to hear from the source on high that likely has little interest in wasting their precious time getting drawn into your mad little world should tell you all you need to know about the value your idea holds to people at large.

[Galaxy Brain]

Just make them like, 10% bigger and they'll be perfect. Still a challenge but just a scootch less annoying

[tidge]

As if we ever needed evidence that certain people don't play redside (enough):

23 hours ago, Oubliette_Red said:

Regarding the subject at hand. I find some caves challenging/annoying, but I would rather run through them tripled in size then go into the equivalent Arachnos multi-layers, multi-ramped, Empire State Building tall pancaking map.

I simply can't imaging anyone who would complain about a 'stack of pancakes' cave wouldn't have a Chernobyl-level meltdown over this room.

 

I love the aesthetic of that room, but I hate that it appears in *defeat all* missions. I can't recall ever having to find a glowie objective in that room, but that scenario would also be a nightmare.

[Sovera]

21 hours ago, SwitchFade said:

The idea of changing the caves is prohibitively labor intensive.

 

Due to this fact, the priority of such a change, even if the majority wanted it, places this idea squarely at 9,999,999 out of 10,000,000 in priority ranking.

 

The devs have mentioned that time resource is scarce numerous times. That RIGHT THERE makes it a norm to discuss things in the scope of said limited resource.

 

If that helps, I rephrased as well. The simple logic of it can't be dispelled by the argument that we're not allowed to make it. That's like saying only Pythagoras can use his theorem.

 

Hard no vote: I like blue caves, and I don't need to justify my likes.

 

Hard no vote: resource prohibitive.

Is it though? I don't know. You act as if you do. You could perhaps enlighten the rest of us.

 

I look at the Architect. I have a map chosen. I want to replace it for a different map. I click on a dropdown menu and change it. I don't know what are the dev tools the programmers have for CoH. The way people talk sometimes it sounds like they are coding things entirely by hand on notepad. Is there an UI interface?

 

I... don't... know...

 

But you seem to do. Enlighten the rest of us.

 

I figure changing one map for another would indeed mess the mission. I don't know if, like the AE, the spawn allocation has anchors and they will appear there or if each map needs to have spawns set by hand one at a time. The objectives probably do. Maybe. The radio missions seem to do it at random but maybe not.

 

15 hours ago, Chrome said:

k

They are acting obtuse on purpose. Nothing you've said seems unreasonable to me especially a dev chiming in. It would be nice to have someone who is actually involved and not a peanut gallery programmer, someone who actually uses the game tools, to drop by and chime in.

 

'Well yeah, removing a map and replacing it, then altering the spawns and objectives. Why, that may be as much as an hour and a half per map! We have 107 of those maps in use so you can imagine it is way too much of an undertaking'.

[Oginth]

1 hour ago, tidge said:

 

I love the aesthetic of that room, but I hate that it appears in *defeat all* missions. I can't recall ever having to find a glowie objective in that room, but that scenario would also be a nightmare.

I won't mind the caves if the hints on the mini map appear a lot sooner. A serious lot sooner.

[SwitchFade]

5 hours ago, Sovera said:

Is it though? I don't know. You act as if you do. You could perhaps enlighten the rest of us.

 

I look at the Architect. I have a map chosen. I want to replace it for a different map. I click on a dropdown menu and change it. I don't know what are the dev tools the programmers have for CoH. The way people talk sometimes it sounds like they are coding things entirely by hand on notepad. Is there an UI interface?

 

I... don't... know...

 

But you seem to do. Enlighten the rest of us.

 

I figure changing one map for another would indeed mess the mission. I don't know if, like the AE, the spawn allocation has anchors and they will appear there or if each map needs to have spawns set by hand one at a time. The objectives probably do. Maybe. The radio missions seem to do it at random but maybe not.

 

They are acting obtuse on purpose. Nothing you've said seems unreasonable to me especially a dev chiming in. It would be nice to have someone who is actually involved and not a peanut gallery programmer, someone who actually uses the game tools, to drop by and chime in.

 

'Well yeah, removing a map and replacing it, then altering the spawns and objectives. Why, that may be as much as an hour and a half per map! We have 107 of those maps in use so you can imagine it is way too much of an undertaking'.

Aside from work...

 

Had a client that worked at blizzard. Just one of several examples I could reference, but a good one. He began during Diablo 2. Moved on to wildstar. He led the team that did environmental art, design, etc. Of course there's a user interface, post art rendering he would design, create and manipulate landscapes, interiors, maps and so forth.

 

The sheer time it took to change something at a location, from artwork and placement to spawn npc spawn and scale were not in the hours, this was the better part of days. This was a team of 5 people. This doesn't even include the coding to assure that every occurence of every map at every location it could spawn was addressed. For every version, if there were random instances. This was just placement. Multiply that by every occurence that had to be changed.

 

Now, at work...

 

When an engineer has to do basic work, not even at that level, for 4 corner, endurance, HTCB, burn in, current draw, consumption, back end performance, overprovisioning, latency, noise, rail measurements loss, or any of a number of tests we perform, these are weeks long ordeals, for a team of 12. That's not even discussing firmware.

 

That's just base level hardware performance. When we get to GUI, this is months to create, implement and debug.

 

At the highest level of systems change, which requires a well defined interface, just changing systems that involve projects, PLM, ECO, ERP systems, supply chain systems, analytics systems... That's months to years. Of course, none of this is video game programming.

 

Even if the UI that was used to change a map from one to another were as simple as AE, imagine every map, every contact, every story arc, every MOB spawn point, every arc... So on...

 

You know, referring to people who are actually intelligent, capable and POSSIBLY well informed as the 'Peanut Gallery' is wholly uncalled for. As valid as your "how do you know" questions is...

 

How do you know that I don't know?

[Sovera]

6 minutes ago, SwitchFade said:

How do you know that I don't know?

In fact, I don't and asked.

 

But you just quoted an example from a different thing than CoH. So we are back at the start. You don't know (or do you? I got lost mid-way). Maybe it's super hard. Maybe it's as simple as a drop down menu and find + replace the name of things (and even then this might still take an hour to do properly. Or it might not. I don't know).

 

Back at the start. Mocking Chrome because it would take too long. But no one knows if it would.  I understand that even if it's 'just an hour' it would still be 107 hours in my fictional example above and thus not worth it since it works and don't-fix-it-if-it-works.

 

But please, the devs are grown-ups, they don't need ardent defenders protecting them.

[SwitchFade]

59 minutes ago, Sovera said:

In fact, I don't and asked.

 

But you just quoted an example from a different thing than CoH. So we are back at the start. You don't know (or do you? I got lost mid-way). Maybe it's super hard. Maybe it's as simple as a drop down menu and find + replace the name of things (and even then this might still take an hour to do properly. Or it might not. I don't know).

 

Back at the start. Mocking Chrome because it would take too long. But no one knows if it would.  I understand that even if it's 'just an hour' it would still be 107 hours in my fictional example above and thus not worth it since it works and don't-fix-it-if-it-works.

 

But please, the devs are grown-ups, they don't need ardent defenders protecting them.

Perhaps you missed the mention...

 

Devs themselves brought up the resource constraint multiple times. This validates the consideration being discussed. There's no 'defending the devs', this is a matter of voicing a preference.

 

Voicing that this change is undesired AND time intensive is valid. Further, even if it were desired, as I mentioned previously, this would then move to a priority list of changes, where in it would be very low ranking. 

 

All of a sudden, no one is allowed to voice a position on the preferential use of the limited resource? Wouldn't that be EXACTLY what a society is supposed to do, vote for what changes they want and don't and best use of resources? I mean, if there's X amount of time and Y amount of Capital, wouldn't we vote on what infrastructure project best serves the greater good through majority vote?

 

I mean, now, I'm NOT allowed to have a voice?!

[Sovera]

1 minute ago, SwitchFade said:

Perhaps you missed the mention...

 

Devs themselves brought up the resource constraint multiple times. This validates the consideration being discussed. There's no 'defending the devs', this is a matter of voicing a preference.

 

Voicing that this change is undesired AND time intensive is valid. Further, even if it were desired, as I mentioned previously, this would then move to a priority list of changes, where in it would be very low ranking. 

 

All of a sudden, no one is allowed to voice a position on the preferential use of the limited resource? Wouldn't that be EXACTLY what a society is supposed to do, vote for what changes they want and don't and best use of resources? I mean, if there's X amount of time and Y amount of Capital, wouldn't we vote on what infrastructure project best serves the greater good through majority vote?

 

I mean, now, I'm NOT allowed to have a voice?!

Shh.. Calm down...  Your freedom of speech is still intact. It's fine... it's fine... shh...

 

😄 No ill will towards you Switch.

 

The devs mention time constraints. Of course. There is nothing done that does not have time constraints. I'm a landlord and I have time constraints all the time. I may be fixing an apartment and see how I could pladur the whole ceiling and then cringe because no, time constraints, fix stuff, get it rented again.

But this has no bearing with the argument here. Of -course- there are time constraints, and same as I do and everyone else out there does its something worked with.

 

 

But, seriously. We are a democracy now? I'd understand if we had a poll from the devs giving us choices and we were arguing the choices:

 

'Option A! Recipe to cancel white and yellow salvage. This will take two days to code.

'Option B! We fixing TW bois. This will take six months (why hello tanker buffs).

'Option C! The community hates the tiny caves. We are replacing them with the larger carves. This will take two months'.

 

And now yes we would be arguing how removing the caves serves no purpose, how some like them, how those two months could be used for something else.

 

 

What actually happens is that we have zero influence on what the devs decide. They do what they decide to do. People asking for things may be heard, sure, but I see no point in players refuting things because they will take too long. If it takes too long the devs know it better than the players do.

 

There is no scale where the devs are weighting things: 'Hmmm... Five players would like to change the caves, but we have three of them saying it will take too long, hmmmmmmmm....'

[ImpousVileTerror]

Honestly, I'm not even sure -what- the Homecoming Devs do to make their decisions.  The most they've "told us" (as far as I've seen), is the occasional "Like" Rep on a post where one member of the community suggested to another that the Devs would probably appreciate seeing hard math on a proposal.  I can't even find the post in question, but I'll bookmark it if I stumble across it again.

Their specific methods are still largely hidden from us.

 

The most I could find, and this was a search for over an hour, is:  https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/16180-development-philosophy-and-community-servers/page/5/?tab=comments#comment-174910

It's very informative, but still doesn't get in to the gritty of specifics of the Team's methods, or even what their design philosophy is.

 

I will say this:  Every game developer is a human being.

That means they are just as flawed and as brilliant as any other member of our species.

I think, personally, that we should appeal to them and respect them as human beings, and not as authorities.  They're capable of, and ALLOWED to make mistakes.  We should be able to speak to that without stripping the Devs down to nothing, nor raising them up above reproach.  That way, when mistakes happen, we can try to find a way to make repairs, rather than scaring/dragging the Devs in to a corner where they need to double-down.

 

Edited June 22, 2020 by ImpousVileTerror
Found something tangible.

[gameboy1234]

14 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Just make them like, 10% bigger and they'll be perfect. Still a challenge but just a scootch less annoying

This is exactly the same idea I've had, although I think you'd need to go at least 50% bigger.  Some of those caves are really narrow.  (But I wouldn't mind seeing a graphical upgrade as well, like perhaps the upgrading the textures).

 

11 hours ago, Oginth said:

I won't mind the caves if the hints on the mini map appear a lot sooner. A serious lot sooner.

Thinking about the game design a bit, it would be fun if more of the mobs spoke.  That way you could "find" the mobs without having to resort an immersion breaking device like a minimap.  Other idea: once the total number of mobs on a map is less than one group, have them all ambush you.  That way the last guy in a corner will find you.

 

We could also improve the group code AI so that one guy in a corner is still counted as part of a group, and attacks when their group is attacked.  So the mob in a corner doesn't get missed in the first place.

 

[JayboH]

Again, I want to stress:  if updating cave maps is too labor intensive, you are also basically saying that any new content/maps will never happen from now until the end of time for the exact same reasons you are providing, only that new stuff is far worse as far as that goes.

[gameboy1234]

3 minutes ago, JayboH said:

Again, I want to stress:  if updating cave maps is too labor intensive, you are also basically saying that any new content/maps will never happen

Hmm, they might be saying "return on investment" instead.  If updating maps is really labor intensive, do we want to replace some perfectly serviceable maps with other maps, or do we create all new maps for all new content?  That aspect has to be considered as well.  Assuming we have the resources, where do we best assign them?  Re-creating old content might not be the best use of valuable time and money.

 

OTOH, if we never get the resources to update any maps, then it's all moot regardless.  Until there's actually enough money to pays some artists, this is all castles in the air.  It's still fun to talk about though.

 

[ImpousVileTerror]

There is a potential issue with that assessment, JayboH, though.

Old maps are built on old technology.  The dev toolkits for them might be lost forever.

However, the Homecoming Team -might- be able to develop NEW tools for NEW maps.  Take a look at bases.  They're built out of a different system.

So, while we may not be able to modify the existing mission maps, we may still be able to craft entirely new ones.

[JayboH]

2 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

Hmm, they might be saying "return on investment" instead.  If updating maps is really labor intensive, do we want to replace some perfectly serviceable maps with other maps, or do we create all new maps for all new content?  That aspect has to be considered as well.  Assuming we have the resources, where do we best assign them?  Re-creating old content might not be the best use of valuable time and money.

 

OTOH, if we never get the resources to update any maps, then it's all moot regardless.  Until there's actually enough money to pays some artists, this is all castles in the air.  It's still fun to talk about though.

 

 

1 hour ago, ImpousVileTerror said:

There is a potential issue with that assessment, JayboH, though.

Old maps are built on old technology.  The dev toolkits for them might be lost forever.

However, the Homecoming Team -might- be able to develop NEW tools for NEW maps.  Take a look at bases.  They're built out of a different system.

So, while we may not be able to modify the existing mission maps, we may still be able to craft entirely new ones.

That's fine, recreation in the new tools is great; but a couple people are fighting really hard to not get any improvements made at all to what in my eyes gets an awful lot of complaints over the years:  the blue/purple caves

[srmalloy]

4 hours ago, ImpousVileTerror said:

Old maps are built on old technology.  

From a conversation with Matt Miller, all of the interior maps are built from pre-made 'blocks' that are linked together to make up a cavern or lab/office floor. Unfortunately, the tools that the devs used to do this weren't very sophisticated, and they required considerable hand tweaking to get the pieces in the right positions. It was more a problem with the yellow office maps added in CoV, but if you remember running across maps that had a black wall across a corridor obstructing view but not movement, this was what happened when the devs didn't get the map sections aligned properly -- the game 'saw' that the current map section didn't connect to the next, and just stopped rendering at the gap.

 

Without recreating tools to manipulate the map sections, the devs aren't going to be able to modify existing maps or create new ones.

[Marine X]

whew... quite the read to catch up to this point in the topic so as to be informed as to what has been covered.

 

I am always a little cautious of change, and of any level of Cancel Culture. I waited for years for this game to return, and to see those God Forsaken Blue Caves again, I think I may have even chuckled a little the first time I ended up in the Spawn of Satan Council Pool Complex. I would like to see new content, new maps, new mission Arcs, new base items, new costume pieces and maybe even some new Giant Monsters.

But I don't want to start replacing existing assets and content. I play on Homecoming because they are taking a slow and careful approach to developing the game, preserving the original game as much as possible, improving it where they can and I think that is for the best.

The OP mentioned running into the Blue Caves Map doing Radio Missions, maybe they could just be removed as a potential map assignment there, and left In place for the original assignments they were created for. That would hopefully help remove some of the frustration without removing them entirely from the game. I have no first hand knowledge of the Devs situation. I do however know my own. If I were to donate my time to a project like this, at the end of the day, I would like to see tangible results. They have many been at this for years to get to the point we are at. Hopefully there will be many more years ahead of us, with New things introduced along the way and the old things right where we remember them.

 

 

[Llewellyn Blackwell]

While I cnt say for certain, I do seem to recall a few early conversations here last year around this time, asking about the idea of updating all city zones like AP got face lifted back on live, as well as fleshing out Khallsiti wharf, and the HC team seemed to express that npc placement/spawns/behavior, and map creation and alteration was some of the most difficult work they could begin to undertake and for their small team would demand basically all their time for quite a while to come if that was to become their focus.

 

AE p building is basically just connecting tile sets( anyone who place pen and paper D&D is likely familiar with the pre made boxes of dungeon tiles you can buy), and to me I think that is what is causing this disconnect for some here. They see AE and how we just pick a map for a mish in it, and think hm well thats easy I could create a hundred new missions a day like this. But being the artist that creates those dungeon tiles is a whole different level then the DM who uses them even if creatively to create a random dungeon for his players game session.

 

And again its not even the work for me thats the reason not to. I do not consider maps that confuse and disorient players some annoyance to remove, but a challenge that should if anything be the standard for new maps going forward. I was one of those that never used some map ui overlay to cheat my way through the maze of the perez park forest. You see in gaming there is a type of gaming skill referred to as content mastery. It dates back to the original days of video games like the first Mario Brothers. Remember how to reach the final boss you had to take a very specific path on each screen and if you didnt ever stop to think, who could run on until time ran out.

 

Learning the ins and outs of a room like the pancake room isnt all that hard. Yes as someone who has hover on the majority of his characters its challenge is heavily negated, and that is as it should be. If terrain never made slow hover the optimal solution few would ever bother with it.

 

Since citadel is a regular TF for my namesake to lead folks through, ran it countless times on live and likely a few hundred now on HC. Its a a favored daily for me. All I can say is you want to stop being challenged by content, master said content. But beating the challenge by demanding it removed or lessened on the forums, well yeah nope, fact is folks like that have a pretty derogatory term for them on most other MMO forums, and is one of the few Ive never seen forum moderators remove or infract for using because such gamers who QQ for the game being easier in any way so they dont have to use their ol grey matter are not held up in very high regard by the gaming community in general.

 

Now do I not get were players are coming from here? No, because I really do.

 

Im 40 years old now, my eyes and twitch reflexes are not what they once were. I enjoy a game galled Warframe, it is very fast paced, and not being able to keep up with the younger gamers can lead to real issues. To that end one of my favorite frames in that game is  Titania. her main ability is to turn into a small flying fairy form. Between her flight speed and small size turning every tight tunnel into a canyon I am able to keep up and even out run plenty of the parkour speed running younglings on that game. I had tried other speedy and stealthy frames as well, all to find ways to compensate for my lack rather than demand the tight tunnels made wider, or the long maps made shorter. When I want to play slower frames I solo or only play with RL friends so as to not impact puggles with my slow pokery.

[gameboy1234]

2 hours ago, Marine X said:

The OP mentioned running into the Blue Caves Map doing Radio Missions, maybe they could just be removed as a potential map assignment there, and left In place for the original assignments they were created for.

I just wanted to highlight a suggestion I made a while back on this thread:  if the caves are replaced, I'd like to see them added to Ouroboros, including the old missions they were intended for.  I can understand that people might feel nostalgic for the old maps (heck I might on occasion), I just feel that the maps really should be replaced in normal gameplay if we have the resources and time available to do so.

 

[EmmySky]

I think the problem with the purple caves is the texture.  Its too hard to differentiate wall vs open passageway.  I dont have near the problems in brown caves and I think its the interaction of the texture with the light on the material of the surface.  Maybe they could tweek the material to not be so shiney or soften the texture so its not so variegated.

Edited June 22, 2020 by EmmySky