I have found some very interesting things in the Puzzle Maker file system

In the common/portal2_dlc2/materials/puzzlemaker folder we can see some very interesting things. 1 is the textures for the much wanted signs, like the 1, 2 and 3 signs represented by dots you see in Valve's levels. There are also others like the moon sign and wave sign.

Then if you precede into the palatte subfolder, we can see....

CRUSHERS!!!

Also, world portals!!!! And a slightly odd 3 faith plate thing....

So I'd say Valve were working on these, and then didn't end up implementing them in time. Do you reckon we will see them sometime soon?

Evidence

http://gyazo.com/facc2391299bc768ec2c9723d2c5f65e

http://gyazo.com/88db55f017ea501bfb0bd61615d4caab

On another note, does anyone know how to implement new instances/textures, like the broken glass, dirty walls etc. into the game properly? I've seen people attempt it, but does anyone know how to actually do it?

SIDRAT wrote:
On another note, does anyone know how to implement new instances/textures, like the broken glass, dirty walls etc. into the game properly? I've seen people attempt it, but does anyone know how to actually do it?

Load your map in Hammer, and change the textures?

spongylover123 wrote:
they won't be worked on and they wont be added.
Crushers , autoportals, and 128 catapults uses special things that Valve doesn't want to add.

What do you mean special things

and why are they called 128 catapults

The crushers are not in the PTI for two reasons:
1) You need invisible triggers for them. (valve doesn't want invisible stuff in the pti.)
2) Almost every crusher in game is different, so one instance won't cover it all

Maybe the crushers will be added later

lpfreaky90 wrote:
Maybe the crushers will be added later

but I think this shows that they at least initially started invisible triggers, so they did consider it

SIDRAT wrote:
lpfreaky90 wrote:

Maybe the crushers will be added later

but I think this shows that they at least initially started invisible triggers, so they did consider it

They did, and they still consider it for a possible future update.

SIDRAT wrote:
I don't use hammer, mainly cause it just seems clunky and hard to pick up compared to the level editor. I want to have at least some of the capability of hammer, but with the convenience of the level editor

It is hard to pick up compared to the level editor. But you can really just build everything you can in the level editor and then add and delete what you can't with the PTI by using Hammer.

This way, you won't have to go through countless tutorials for now. Just watch one that describes the basic ways to look around and select things etc., and then search for tutorials about the one thing you want to implement and do it.

zivi7 wrote:
SIDRAT wrote:

I don't use hammer, mainly cause it just seems clunky and hard to pick up compared to the level editor. I want to have at least some of the capability of hammer, but with the convenience of the level editor

It is hard to pick up compared to the level editor. But you can really just build everything you can in the level editor and then add and delete what you can't with the PTI by using Hammer.

This way, you won't have to go through countless tutorials for now. Just watch one that describes the basic ways to look around and select things etc., and then search for tutorials about the one thing you want to implement and do it.

While you could do this I wouldn't suggest it. I recommend using a starter guide on hammer to first learn the basics of the program.

You need the basics because in order to do the more advanced things like disabling faithplates, more complex logic and indicator lights require at least some basic knowledge. I highly recommend at least doing the basic tutorial on the vdc.

Once you got the basics covered (the tutorial is really good) you can do the more advanced stuff most people want to do. This way hammer will make a lot more sense and it'll be a lot quicker to do all the stuff in your maps

lpfreaky90 wrote:
The crushers are not in the PTI for two reasons:
1) You need invisible triggers for them. (valve doesn't want invisible stuff in the pti.)

Wait... is that official Valve policy? Because the piston lift does in fact have an invisible trigger. If you don't connect anything to it it, it will rise or lower as soon as the player steps on it, without a clear indication that it is going to do that.
(I'm not saying that this doesn't make sense, because it does, and it's often useful to have in a map. It just seems that it would violate a hypothetical "no surprise trigger" policy.)

proof:

The invisible trigger in the case of the elevator is really logical:
Step on elevator -> elevator goes up.

With a crusher it'd be:
Step on surface below crusher* -> crusher comes down at you with a speed of ? and a delay of ?...
* depends on the position where you placed it, how far is it from the ceiling?
? depends on the height again
? depends on what you want to use the crusher for: could a player quickly pass it if they have speed gel?

Too many variables, the elevator is much more straight forward.

I am seeing a lot of cool things I normally wouldn't see in the Puzzle Creator. I wonder if this tool will get more advanced as time goes on, but not to the extent of Hammer.

SIDRAT wrote:
I don't use hammer, mainly cause it just seems clunky and hard to pick up compared to the level editor. I want to have at least some of the capability of hammer, but with the convenience of the level editor

Yup, I want it to be that way.

wildgoosespeeder wrote:
Yup, I want it to be that way.

Yeah. If I really wanted to I could learn hammer. But im a biggie for deisgn. 1). The PeTI looks nice 2). It allows me to PROPERLY see my test chamber as I build it....

CamBen wrote:
actually, i can see my test just fine as I build it in hammer. it ha 4 useful veiwpoints, allowing for a very flexible camera system.

I love the multiple viewpoints in hammer: it allows me a good overview. If a map really complex with multiple layers, off-grid decorations, rotated brushes and more of that stuff hammer might get confusing but then you have visgroups to solve that problem.

The PTI only has one camera and with more complex pti levels I sometimes have a lot of problems selecting the proper items. For complex maps I think hammer's camera modes are better then the pti.

lpfreaky90 wrote:
CamBen wrote:

actually, i can see my test just fine as I build it in hammer. It has 4 useful veiwpoints, allowing for a very flexible camera system.

I love the multiple viewpoints in hammer: it allows me a good overview. If a map really complex with multiple layers, off-grid decorations, rotated brushes and more of that stuff hammer might get confusing but then you have visgroups to solve that problem.

The PTI only has one camera and with more complex pti levels I sometimes have a lot of problems selecting the proper items. For complex maps I think hammer's camera modes are better then the pti.

i agree with the above statement completely.

lpfreaky90 wrote:
Step on surface below crusher* -> crusher comes down at you with a speed of ? and a delay of ?...
* depends on the position where you placed it, how far is it from the ceiling?
? depends on the height again
? depends on what you want to use the crusher for: could a player quickly pass it if they have speed gel?

Too many variables, the elevator is much more straight forward.

• You can prevent a person from placing the item when the distance is too great. (ie limit it to 2 spaces max, otherwise invalid)
  ? see above, predetermined speed/speed options in the editor (this can work thanks to the fact that the crusher has a full smash animation. To slow it down all you need to do is use SetPlaybackRate, and add delays to stuff synced accordingly. You can do all this in the instance and merely have the option in the editor enable/disable relay setups.

? This should trigger it anyway: If your speeding by, it will still try to kill you, it just won't because your too fast.