This is something I have wondered for a while. Not sure if with source its the same as goldsource and the actual name of the .bsp will work regardless of there being a dod_ prefix.

It would be easier with regards to checking out releases as most posters dont include which dod version the map is made for in their subject line.

**edit**
Why aren't source maps called dods_ ?

Just noticed that the underscore doesnt show up in the subject line. Bah.

Why are CS:S Maps not called css_mapname ?
Maybe its shorter and sounds better... and maybe it helps to force the people to turn to the light side (Source) :D

by the light side you of course mean the dark side.. :vader:

What I mean is that if custom mappers cant put which dod version their map is made for in the subject header then if they all started to call their maps dods_ if their made for source at least that would stop people from having to check each release just to see which dod version its for.

Well, there's very few, see almost no more mappers still mapping for 1.3, as it is too constraining for the creativity of the mappers :P Source offers so much more IMO, especially in the aesthetics department :P

90% of the new Maps are DoD:S Maps.. and i think dod_mapname sounds better than dods_mapname.. :p

Yeah it's just a shame that people are trying to forget that 1.3 ever existed.

It's like 1984. 'Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'

I just thought it would be nice for the two versions to have a seperate identifier. Oh no, a thought, nooooooooooooo!

Hell thats marketing... these guys would be stupid if they would seperate it completly.. because their goal is to get to people from 1.3 to source... thats normal business... ;)

Yeah I know I know. Progression.

To me since source came out for some reason I thought it would be the done thing for maps to have a dods_ prefix.

<tut> There I go again. Thinking.