One of the main problems of modern games, I think, is that developers often can't find a fine balance between the story and gameplay. It results in a lot of tedious sequences without much context, or, in contrast - continuous interruption of action with cut scenes.
Level design has a tendency to fall a victim of poor balance as well. Level structure must create the context for the story while providing opportunities to use gameplay elements to their full potential.
Genre and game features usually define how the levels are made. If we take a look at shooter games, maps are usually made as a series of paths that lead from point A to point B, sprinkled with occasional ammo boxes and cover opportunities. They tend to be linear (with rare exceptions like Crysis) and give player a very limited choice in how to proceed further. Multiplayer shooter levels, however, usually have multiple interconnected areas, that allow players to move freely in between them within the constraints of the arena.
Strategy games, ideally, must have a multiplayer type layout even in single player campaign. Unfortunately, in the last decade, most RTS tend to make design decisions like resource and path placement in such a way, that player is being forced to follow a predetermined path. It pretty much takes all the fun out of a strategy.
As I've read in some old magazine once, "there are two ways to play the game - in a manner that developers wanted you to, and wrong."
Like most things, level design usually fails in it's first stage - planning and concepting. If the initial research, concepts, whiteboxing fail, then the level will be bad at it's completion. As simple as that.
And the premise of the game is very important at this stage. Designer must have a clear understanding of what kind of game they are making. Is it 3d or 2d? First or third person? What is the genre? Realistic or stylized?
Some games, even while having a realistic style, have to make compromises in order to make the general experience enjoyable. Good examples of this would be parkour themed Mirror's Edge and Assassin's Creed. Most buildings in real life are nearly impossible to climb. So these games introduce artificial railings, cornices, flag poles, and lots of other things to allow player to have his fun.
In case of AC series, historical accuracy comes into play as well. But it's impossible to recreate everything accurately and expect it to be playable. Virtual cities absolutely must be scaled down, or otherwise it would take an hour of real time to just get from one mission point to another. I was quite surprised to find Piazza San Marco in Venice, for instance, much smaller in game than when I saw it myself while on a trip to Italy. The scale is approximately 1:10.
There are cases, though, where certain design decisions make no sense when looked at with scrutiny. Like, why the hell ventilation tubes that can easily fit a man inside and lead exactly to important strategic points located throughout the secret facility? Or why do they keep around so many barrels containing flammable liquids? Well, answer is quite easy, actually - because these are games, and they should be fun.
***
Here are some links about level design, hopefully, you'll find them useful.
Polycount list of level design links
Interviews with some level desogners on RPS
Professional level designer tells about his workflow
Level design has a tendency to fall a victim of poor balance as well. Level structure must create the context for the story while providing opportunities to use gameplay elements to their full potential.
Genre and game features usually define how the levels are made. If we take a look at shooter games, maps are usually made as a series of paths that lead from point A to point B, sprinkled with occasional ammo boxes and cover opportunities. They tend to be linear (with rare exceptions like Crysis) and give player a very limited choice in how to proceed further. Multiplayer shooter levels, however, usually have multiple interconnected areas, that allow players to move freely in between them within the constraints of the arena.
 |
| HL2 whiteboxing. |
As I've read in some old magazine once, "there are two ways to play the game - in a manner that developers wanted you to, and wrong."
Like most things, level design usually fails in it's first stage - planning and concepting. If the initial research, concepts, whiteboxing fail, then the level will be bad at it's completion. As simple as that.
And the premise of the game is very important at this stage. Designer must have a clear understanding of what kind of game they are making. Is it 3d or 2d? First or third person? What is the genre? Realistic or stylized?
Some games, even while having a realistic style, have to make compromises in order to make the general experience enjoyable. Good examples of this would be parkour themed Mirror's Edge and Assassin's Creed. Most buildings in real life are nearly impossible to climb. So these games introduce artificial railings, cornices, flag poles, and lots of other things to allow player to have his fun.
 |
| Piazza San Marco |
There are cases, though, where certain design decisions make no sense when looked at with scrutiny. Like, why the hell ventilation tubes that can easily fit a man inside and lead exactly to important strategic points located throughout the secret facility? Or why do they keep around so many barrels containing flammable liquids? Well, answer is quite easy, actually - because these are games, and they should be fun.
***
Here are some links about level design, hopefully, you'll find them useful.
Polycount list of level design links
Interviews with some level desogners on RPS
Professional level designer tells about his workflow
No comments:
Post a Comment