Task 16: Level design

As stated in the task brief, level design is not the visual appearance of the level, but rather the mapping and construction of the level as an interactive layout. Similarly to good composition, good level design will guide the player without them realising it, and especially in the case of singleplayer experiences, will direct the flow of story in a seemingly natural and nonrestrictive way. This can mean laying out an environment in such a way that players are naturally drawn to various interactive elements without feeling walled-in, when of course the level in actuality is significantly smaller than it would appear. Good level design will promote exploration where exploration is needed, and "getting lost" is a difficult thing to get right in these situations. Pacing becomes incredibly important, to ensure that the player never gets bored nor overwhelmed by what is happening in the game environment. "Metroid" on the NES (back in 1986!) is a stellar example of level design. At the time, the platform genre was beginning to be defined by games like Super Mario Bros, and despite some deviation from the trend, the vast majority of these experiences were linear.


Metroid, for most players, introduced a new way to look at these 2D environments. It allowed players to explore in all directions across the level, with backtracking being a foundation stone of the series. Players would progress in one direction before being halted by an impassable door or an unbeatable enemy, and then would have to return to old rooms to find a way to proceed, perhaps acquiring a key or a better weapon. This meant that as players moved through the game, they were given constant reminders of areas they could not yet access, giving the game a strong sense of progression when these areas were finally explored. This kind of non-linear level design is now found in most singleplayer games, and generally enriches the experience. In some cases, these off-shoot areas are not mandatory, and this gives the player control over how long they spend in a particular environment.

For competitive multiplayer games, stong level design must bring human players together in such a way that the maximum interactivity occurs (in a traditional competitive experience at least). MOBA games like Dota 2 rely on clean, simple layouts to guide players into various areas in order to win the game. Dota 2, in this instance, largely separates the 2 teams into 3 distinct routes across the map or "lanes". Now, gamers as a species will always, if they can, break something. It's interesting to note that in my own experiences with Dota 2, any attempts to "break" the game by forcing all of the team players into one lane and generally not playing the game as it was intended always lead to our own defeat. That is, the level design is so strong and works perfectly with all the other elements of the game that any attempts to "outsmart" the system were futile. This shows that level design must work synonymously with all other elements of the game, be it the character movements, the shooting mechanics or even in the case of games like "Outlast" (A first-person horror game) with the players inability to see clearly.


https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioObT14HESeHScurYBs0buGsK99rMANfBH23Hj33PDJCNqNb9h9I8w4YTUONhrBbNe-76xnjx78_MzGfIJ7J1UsCR2sjejje2OVmbAat1dgjGlhswGbtr3EJXqlMHgYhOv0heC2ujhCuaP/s1600/Metroid.png
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/132700/twisted_timeline_iterative_level_.php?print=1
http://www.worldsfactory.net/2013/07/17/dota-2-review-a-compelling-and-comprehensive-game
http://gaming.wikia.com/wiki/Metroidvania