page 13/13
Ben's small bible of realistic multiplayer leveldesign
by Benjamin Bauer
"an article describing how
to make a multiplayer level
from scratch to the end for a realistic setting"
go to 'page 12 of the article "Ben's small bible of realistic multiplayer leveldesign"
Even if your setting is realistic, the game itself
can be very different. It can be something ultra realistic like American
Army or something more arcady like Action Quake. The strategic design
for both kinds of extremes is almost the same. They all need a balanced
basic structure and good navigation/orientation. The real differences
are in the tactical elements.
If the player can only move realistically for the majority of the game
the player it is quite slow. If the player dies very quickly, tactical
team play und unpredictable gameplay are the key game elements instead
of rushing and making crazy stunts. Cover should be closer together and
in bigger battle areas, support/cover spots for the attacking squad become
very important. Always think about camper and sniper positions and how
the opposing team can counter them with tactics. If one hidden sniper
can cover the edge of an important house and the attackers can only peek
around the corner and get a headshot or run for four seconds over an open
field with no support from the back, it might become quite frustrating.
If the first three squad mates have to die before you know where the damn
sniper is lying, you should increase the tactical variation heavily. On
the other hand, if one 40mm grenade can be fired accurately over 200m
and kill everyone in a radius of 5m, the defenders also need the possibility
to become unpredictable. In a realistic game it is simply a fact that
the defenders have a huge advantage. So if the attackers want to be successful
they have to change the tactics very often, use smoke grenades, counter
sniping, covering fire, etc. to break through the defense lines. You as
the designer, have to give them all these possibilities and if the players
don't use them and keep playing like rambos it is simply their fault.
On the other side, if the player can run with 50 kilometres an hour, he
has to care less about snipers if he has to sprint four seconds to another
cover spot. Taking the risks and cool stunts are strong elements for the
fun factor of more arcade game modes. Yes, it was simply cool in Action
Quake to strafe, jump 20m to the next roof and surprise the other team.
Just make sure that such cool stunts are possible in your maps, the fans
will really like to make completely crazy actions. Now campers and lame
phlagmetic base defenders have no chance and the whole game becomes faster
and more aggressive. Now a single rambo player can wipe out a complete
noob team with less problems, but hey that is Hollywood action and the
player's problem, not yours. As long as the rambo player can do it in
every team because your map is well balanced, it should be okay. It is
your job as a level designer to support the features of the game you build
for. If you make your map so extremely hard and boring for attackers and
defenders, that it is the same as playing an ultra realistic game, you
definitely did something wrong.
I guess what I am telling some of the level designers
out there might come as a bit of a shock. From my experience of working
with a lot of other designers, quite often they would complain about the
game design without thinking that something with their level design might
be wrong. Normally there is a fine line between game design and level
design but smart people are able to think in the right way and know where
the problem might be. So my advice for the level designer with problematic
areas in their maps is to consider that there is a fair chance that it
can be his fault, too.
For example, the game designer decides that all thin wooden planks are
destroyable. Now the leveldesigner complains that he sometimes need undestroyable
boards because otherwise the opponent can destroy the only cover in that
area very quickly. He decides that some of the planks in his level can
not be damaged. Okay, if something has special features it should be obvious
that all similar objects have the same abilities. Continuity is an old
school design rule and should never be changed. If you have problems with
one of the special objects in that specific situation then you simply
shouldn't place it there. Just use your brain and think about another
solution like a lower stone wall as cover or whatever. Causing frustration
and perplexity is the last thing you want in your level.
I know that you are now waiting for an example where the game design is
wrong instead of the scolded mapper. Especially the problem of badly designed/balanced
weapons shouldn't affect the level design. If a flashbang blinds everyone
in a radius of 50m, the designer shouldn't make too many small areas in
the level. Frag grenades which you can throw through the whole level and
it remember more about artillery shouldn't produce levels where every
wall is 30m height. Before the submachinegun is too powerful and the mappers
only design wide open fields in their levels, they should start a small
revolution against the game designers. I guess since you've read the article
this far, you have enough experience to remember enough of the other examples.
Discussions are good as long as both sides are able to accept that they
might be wrong, and are able to make compromises.
I could probably write a completely new article
on the subject of creativity but I would like to keep this short. If you
read through the whole article, please don't expect that you can now build
the greatest levels of all time. Perhaps you can now create some quite
solid multiplayer maps but they are still nothing really special without
your own creative input! Every good designer has his systems which he
uses to create levels but even the best didn't have their greatest ideas
on command. Normally you think about a problem or something which might
spice up your level until you get a headache and then suddenly, when you
least expect it, you find the solution. Great ideas can come to you; under
the shower, on the toilet, smoking on the balcony, before you fall asleep
or whenever you are relaxing. This is normal and nobody can expect you
to come up with ideas to order.
Great ideas are born if you don't think about the problem and suddenly
it pops up into your mind so try to make sure that you work in a peaceful,
inspiring environment without a lot of stress around you. Go out for a
walk, customize your desk like a greenhouse (an extreme example but I've
seen it done), relax or do something completely different as long as you
don't have to think very hard. If you have no real idea about your strategy
plan, just use an already approved oldschool one, modify it a little bit
and then you might have cool ideas for the tactical parts. At least this
is how it happens to me very often.
It is nothing really new that level designers take their ideas from movies,
music videos or even from some cheap B-movie style TV series. A single
scene in any action movie can already give you the idea of a tactical
scene in your new level. Take this as a base and complete it with a strategy
plan, do some research about the environment and you will get enough other
ideas to fill the level. In the end nobody knows that it was a Bon Jovi
video which gave you the mental kick for a kick ass map because it was
just the first impulse for your own creative work.
Who am I writing this for? Definitely for the level
designers out there. Sharing his own knowledge so that everyone might
learn something and improve their skills is becoming a rare virtue in
that community. I hope even more people start to write about their experiences
because even I still want to learn something new and I bet you guys have
even more cool ideas. On the other hand, I hope a lot of non-leveldesigners
are reading this long article to get a better idea about the work we are
doing every day. It is already science and almost an art to make good
multiplayer levels and it seems that the majority of people still don't
understand that.
I guess several designers might say that everything they have read here
is just a waste of time because it was all logical and everybody knows
the basics. However, I think there is a big difference between knowing
something and doing what you know! If I think back to some of my maps,
I would find many failures even though I was already clear about all of
these rules. Writing these basic rules helps me to internalize it and
it might also help you to think more clearly about them after you have
read this article.
Building a multiplayer map shouldn't normally be a really big deal but
to design a good one is even harder then designing a single player map.
On the other hand, it is normally harder to build a good, solid singleplayer
level. I don't want to start now with the never ending discussion about
whether it is harder to make a singleplayer or multiplayer maps. If you
have ever built for both for a long time, or even designed them professionally,
then you will have your own opinion which you simply have to respect.
Other people's opinions have a smaller impact on my one but, of course,
I always welcome fair discussions.
Why are you reading this article? ... I guess you should have a good answer
by now because you've already read through my small bible and if you didn't
read anything, shame on you ;-). I hope after reading about the well known
or boring aspects, you have learned something new and enjoyed reading
it.
Thank you for reading
