Was exploration based level design really that much cooler?

[Antroid]

Da Werecat said:

We're all adults, so we value our time. We need games that can be played during lunch breaks.

Dunno, I still prefer games that you have to (and can) immerse yourself in to something that you can get into for fifteen minutes just to pass the time. I just have to wait for the weekend to play them, or for the evening after work if I'm not too tired.

Speaking on topic, I think I vastly prefer exploration in games. Although preferably when it actually has some substance. Not saying that every nook and cranny has to have a reward for me checking it, but a solid amount should have something. And I like when I have to search for something to actually beat the level, even if it's hidden in an assholish way. Actually, even with badly designed exploratory levels where I get lost I still have much fonder memories of them afterwards then of rollercoaster type levels.

[Phobus]

In my experience making a linear (or mostly linear) game or map is much easier, as you only have the one route to balance, make aesthetically acceptable and make enjoyable. You can pour lots of time and resource into one route to make it the best you can possibly do, but to make the same quality spread over multiple options is practically exponential with each added option.

I've been tempted to go for linearity myself in some maps, just to see how they'd be received compared to the largely open layouts I've produced over the last few years. As I see it, the challenge will be in engaging combat and puzzle scenarios rather than an interesting and balanced environment to navigate.

[188DarkRevived]

Da Werecat said:

We're all adults, so we value our time. We need games that can be played during lunch breaks.(:

Come to work with a USB flash drive and play large megawads while relying on the quicksave/quickload feature. There is your salvation. Any unfinished mission would be easily resumed from the comfort of your home after work.

[dew]

Antroid said:

Dunno, I still prefer games that you have to (and can) immerse yourself in to something that you can get into for fifteen minutes just to pass the time. I just have to wait for the weekend to play them, or for the evening after work if I'm not too tired.

188DarkRevived said:

Come to work with a USB flash drive and play large megawads while relying on the quicksave/quickload feature. There is your salvation. Any unfinished mission would be easily resumed from the comfort of your home after work.

That was a joke. It's implied by the smiley face and by the fact that people who play that way are soulless mid-level managers in finance that only imitate joy observed in real humans.

[188DarkRevived]

dew said:

That was a joke. It's implied by the smiley face and by the fact that people who play that way are soulless mid-level managers in finance that only imitate joy observed in real humans.

Yes, I suspected that it may have been a joke. And I was in no way implying that I would ever risk playing DOOM at work.
Heck, if the upcoming diploma works well for me then I wouldn't even have any opportunities to do any gaming at work whatsoever, due to becoming employed at airports and/or airplanes.
But that's not what this topic is about, so don't even bother asking me further questions here.

So. going back to the topic...
It is depressing to see that designers have shifted their focus from providing players with the freedom of choosing pathways to enriching the physical qualities of characters and scenery.
I don't care if the enemy I just shot a minute ago has 4 wrinkles on their forehead while the enemy which I shot a few minutes earlier has only 2 wrinkles.
Just make them wear the uniform that would identify them as enemies of a certain class, and be done with it. This would allow more RAM to remain available for other effects which don't sacrifice exploration.

[Antroid]

188DarkRevived said:

And I was in no way implying that I would ever risk playing DOOM at work.

I have played a lot of Doom at work so far and I'm fine! [/brave]

[188DarkRevived]

Antroid said:

I have played a lot of Doom at work so far and I'm fine! [/brave]

If I were to have an office-based position when I was 20 years old instead of a factory or gas station position then I would've demonstrated my courage the same way that you did.
But that's not what we should be discussing here and now.


Back in the days, I was really hoping that someone would take my favourite adventure game character named Roger Wilco from the Space Quest saga and put him to star inside an FPS spin-off title of some sort, where he would be exploring places and blowing stuff up interchangeably.

[dew]

188DarkRevived said:

It is depressing to see that designers have shifted their focus from providing players with the freedom of choosing pathways to enriching the physical qualities of characters and scenery.
I don't care if the enemy I just shot a minute ago has 4 wrinkles on their forehead while the enemy which I shot a few minutes earlier has only 2 wrinkles.

This is not what the discussion is about, OP doesn't mention visual improvements at all. He talks about gameplay principles and how they can turn sour when taken too far. In particular, sandbox games tend to be favoured by dedicated (PC) gamers, because they tend to be longer and more demanding in principles. Too much freedom on too much playspace, however, can easily lead to obscuring progression goals and grinding the pace to a lengthy halt. On the other side of the spectrum, OP decries the limiting, scripted nature of linear, overly narrated FPSs that almost resemble traditional rail-shooter games. They allow a nearly cinematic experience, but when they go overboard, they limit the game aspect to almost Dragon Lair-style timed button tapping. And now I feel dumber for having to spell out all of this.

By the way, what the discussion also isn't about: our favourite non-FPS old franchises and our dream games based on them, no matter how weakly you shoehorn the "exploration" keyword into it. Be sure to mention how we shouldn't discuss that in your next post, because topic focus seems to be of big importance to you.

[188DarkRevived]

dew said:

By the way, what the discussion also isn't about: our favourite non-FPS old franchises and our dream games based on them, no matter how weakly you shoehorn the "exploration" keyword into it. Be sure to mention how we shouldn't discuss that in your next post, because topic focus seems to be of big importance to you.

You know what else it's not about? Holding an eternal grudge against someone just because their opinion about a political issue or whatever a while ago has been different from yours.
Therefore, you can trip over your own words and faceplant. You're welcome. Grow a pair.

[dew]

That's also not what we should be discussing here and now. It would be nice if you stopped polluting threads with unrelated tangents. And you've used "grow a pair" in a nonsensical manner. It implies cowardice, not inability to get over a grudge.

[188DarkRevived]

dew said:

And you've used "grow a pair" in a nonsensical manner. It implies cowardice, not inability to get over a grudge.

I'm smart enough to realize that one potential reason of why a person can't get over a grudge may be due to the fear of accepting defeat.
Therefore, the phrase may have been quite appropriate.

And I would very much like not to have to explain these things here to you and leave this thread alone.

[doom_is_great]

As long as there are plenty of baddies to shoot while exploring, then exploration is awesome, at least IMO.

[kristus]

All I can say is that I loved the exploration aspect of SS2, I never felt that it was too obtuse in any respect. The example with the picture frames to reach the code was a really nice little treasure hunt in my experience.

[Jaxxoon R]

Well, Rondo of Blood had really interconnected levels with virtually no bottomless pits. If you fell into a hole you'd be likely to end up on a completely new path, a lot of times leading to a completely different level than the one you were previously on.

Or you'd fall into a pit of water and drown, but it would always be in a logical way (e.g. you're on a bridge above a visible lake in the background, with the actual layout of the section making it obvious that falling is a bad move).

Dracula X, although having many of the same mechanics and assets was an inferior game because its level (and boss) design just wasn't nearly as good. Most maps were frustratingly difficult, linear, and the alternate progression was stripped back to basically 'do this one part perfectly in one go, or you skip an entire stage, boss, and get the bad ending'.

In fact Rondo of Blood even went so far as to pull a Sonic 3 & Knuckles, with a few paths that can only be reached by Maria. This is actually pretty neat, since you can freely revisit stages you've already completed.

[188DarkRevived]

doom_is_great said:

As long as there are plenty of baddies to shoot while exploring, then exploration is awesome, at least IMO.

Yes indeed! I still remember how, back when I played Hexen 1 for the very very first time in my life, how very excited I was whenever I entered into a new hub filled with baddies who could "smell my blood".
I don't even know what exactly excited me more: the fact that I needed to show all the baddies who's boss, or the fact that I needed to find new switches to pull. I guess it was both of those factors combined which made me love that game so much.
There have been some moments where I got stuck trying to solve a puzzle and kept walking around in circles while thinking of possible solutions. It was only during these moments that I got extremely annoyed about the recurrent teleportation spawning of the Ettins.
Each time that a new Ettin teleported inside the map it broke my concentration and I had to start a new train of thought as soon as he got killed... only to discover that it would be broken once again by another spawned Ettin! Grrrrr!!!!
But asides from that, Hexen 1 honestly was and still is my favourite product from that particular game series.

[scifista42]

I'm going to speak mainly about first person shooters now, but my idea could be generalized to other games as well.

Exploration based leveldesign brings the following risks with it:

• Confusion, getting lost
  
• Balance issues (depending on the chosen path)
  
• Demotivation, given by player's limited amount of patience ("I wanna find an exit already!")

"Rail shooter" leveldesign brings these:

• Repetitiveness / low variety
  
• Uncomfortable lack of freedom in player's decisions
  
• Unoriginal / uninteresting playability

Generally I'd say that games very often suffer from these faults typical for their design approach as I've described it. Either exploration based, or linear. That more I appreciate games that manage to avoid these faults.

If I encounter an exploration based game which doesn't have any of the mentioned faults for this kind of game, I'm gonna like it a lot. If I encounter a linear game which doesn't have those faults typical for rail shooters, I'm gonna like it a lot too! Of course only if the games have an interesting setting and gameplay mechanics for me and otherwise comply with my tastes.

I tend to enjoy nonlinear levels more, because according to my observation, linear games actually have the described problems more often than not.

Some people in this thread mentioned that a middle way between a linear and nonlinear approach would be ideal, or different segments of the game changing the pace. There's a point in it, but I don't think it's the only right way. Games doesn't have to be perfect perfect and provide all kinds of experience so that literally everyone can find his own bit of joy. That's why there's many different computer games, each being good in its own way, and everyone can choose which game of which style to play. Perhaps somebody likes rail shooters, so why to add exploration elements to his game to partially please somebody else? And vice versa. I hope you see what I mean. There won't ever be a game to please everybody, anyway.