|
once there was level design. then terrain killed it
#221225
08/12/08 22:11
08/12/08 22:11
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,875
broozar
OP
Expert
|
OP
Expert
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,875
|
hi everyone,
i just played Jedi Knight II once again (in hardest difficulty :P), it's a neat game based on the q3a game engine. q3a couldn't handle terrains well, afaik there was no real terrain support as we'd call it today, all terrain has been made out of bsp geometry.
i want to compare JK2's level design with, say, stalker.
JK2 is a fairly untraditional fps, as you have a melee weapon (lightsaber) that you use almost all the time, a handful of "real" guns, and the mid-range force powers. during the game, the jedi gains power and learns to contol the force better, so he can f.i. jump further and move quicker. many lifts exist in the levels, it's a constant up and down, you revisit placer over and over from different angles and floors, which saves a bunch of pollies and work, but doesnt feel like repetition. in one level, you start in a hangar. over your head is an unreachable walkway with enemies, over that is a vent pipe. you fight your way through the hangar, get in some kind of supervising office, and open the hangar gates, which means that you have a grand view from the top of it all. then you can access the formerly unreachable walkway, and in the end, you move through that vent pipe.
then came the terrain. let's take stalker. eternal walks in the landscape. some houses here and there with 3, 4 rooms at max. military barracks that look the same on every floor. the indoor areas of the labs may look nice, but can't be compared to anything seen in JK2, leveldesign-wise.
many people consider this a great degree of freedom and an achievement. i call it downtime.
what do you think. did the terrain kill the old school level design?
|
|
|
Re: once there was level design. then terrain killed it
[Re: broozar]
#221239
08/13/08 00:39
08/13/08 00:39
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,010 analysis paralysis
NITRO777
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,010
analysis paralysis
|
what do you think. did the terrain kill the old school level design? I havent played the game but if the terrain is like stalker than I would tend to agree with you.
|
|
|
Re: once there was level design. then terrain killed it
[Re: NITRO777]
#221240
08/13/08 01:07
08/13/08 01:07
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,771 Bay City, MI
lostclimate
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,771
Bay City, MI
|
I agree with this too, but it isnt inherently the fault of the ability for nice terrain, but instead it is due to everyones want for huge outdoor environments which, i say is dumb, unless its used like in real life. In real life, you dont run from town to town, you get in a car, or you get on transportation of some sort, cross it as quickly as possible then work your way through large buildings (last part being less realistic, but you get my point.)
|
|
|
Re: once there was level design. then terrain killed it
[Re: Slin]
#222348
08/18/08 22:44
08/18/08 22:44
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,134 Netherlands
Joozey
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,134
Netherlands
|
I disagree, outdoor + terrain can look great in games. Not if you have lazy modellers and are satisfied quickly, but if you take some effort, games can be really great.
Take Uru as an example. Nobody was happy with this 3d non-photorealistic puzzlegame variant of Myst, but it was still beautiful. They made a whole MMORPG out of it with various ages, lands and since it's only about exploring and finding new stunning areas, the focus was on the level design.
Crimson skies for the xbox was also very beautiful IMO. You're flying in airplanes and zeppelins, so yeah, everything is outdoors and quickly reachable. But still, it looks wonderful. Nothing is repetitive.
So it cán be different, just not for all games.
Last edited by Joozey; 08/18/08 22:45.
Click and join the 3dgs irc community! Room: #3dgs
|
|
|
Re: once there was level design. then terrain killed it
[Re: Joozey]
#222369
08/19/08 01:40
08/19/08 01:40
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,178 England
MrGuest
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,178
England
|
I'd say it depends on the player, and you can't please them all! There are those that want to be able to complete a game and brag amongst their friends saying they completed it in 6 hours, then there are those who buy a game and keep playing it for months, it's usually stating "complete freedom" on the box that will determine whether a player will buy it. I think saying it's the terrain that kills a game is somewhat of a cliche that comes with outdoor environments. Whether you get huge environment packed with activity and non-stop adventure, a slower paced game designed for capturing emotion, or an empty field, a designer should be able to take each of these and make it work for the audience they're trying to target. Terrains don't kill games, the inability to create playable environments that does. (and btw FoxZero you fast travel without a horse )
|
|
|
Re: once there was level design. then terrain killed it
[Re: broozar]
#222434
08/19/08 10:44
08/19/08 10:44
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,093 Germany
Toast
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,093
Germany
|
many people consider this a great degree of freedom and an achievement. i call it downtime.
what do you think. did the terrain kill the old school level design? Well I think it's not as simple as that and the terrain feature doesn't really have anything to do with this. Stalker just is a totally different game - you just don't follow pre set routes (as you said mostly indoor and if not you're in a tubular trench or something) but can walk "everywhere" and explore as you want. This can be connected to the downsides you mentioned but it also has its upsides - it's probably up to your personal taste what you prefer... So I wouldn't call the terrain a design killer but just a huge possibility for different games. I mean imagine thinks like Operation Flashpoint or the Battlefield series without outdoor terrains - it just wouldn't work at all in an indoor environment. Terrain is just a feature and it won't work with every game type. With that said using big open terrains wouldn't be of much use in a game like Jedi Outcast (I guess this is what you consider as JKII) just as it's for games like F.E.A.R. or Max Payne. I think there are a couple of games which succesfully combined an open terrain with a highly linear gameplay and that would be games like Half-Life 2 or Quake 4. In those games you're not always in an indoor environment but also outside on a terrain. It still keeps that linear gameplay though by for example making you just drive down that aqueduct or however you may call it in Half-Life 2 and Quake 4 also only has extremely linear outdoor areas where you immediately know which way to go in order to advance... So it's up to you as designer and your game. Terrains aren't of much use for linear, "story-based" shooters but for Multiplayer or games with a focus on exploration you'll really want to use something like that if it fits your design... Enjoy your meal Toast
Last edited by Toast; 08/19/08 10:44.
|
|
|
|