Support NeoGAF

[samoilaaa]

I have been watching a couple of videos ( most of them were from GDC ) about how to make great level design for games from different devs ( EA , Sony , Square Enix and more ) and the points they make are very great , they talk about

how to make a level non linear but also not too big
meaningful content that prevents the player to get bored but also not too much content to overwhelm him
how to use environmental storytelling instead of relying only on cutscenes for telling a story , that way the control isnt taken away from the player too often
how to create different paths to traverse the level but also to stimulate the player with different tools , skills in order to persuade him to make different choices / playthroughs

on paper everything sounds amazing , then they release an actual game and it has nothing that they talked about in their presentation , we get a linear game with constant handholding and cutscenes that take almost half the game , why do they do this ? they are developing the game for 5 years anyway , why not do a good job at least ?

is it money ? is it technology restraints ? is it laziness ?

 

[01011001]

it's easier to make a super dumbed down design, that is simple and less interactive.

that's why.
the average player doesn't care, see how God of War Ragnarök gets praised to high heavens being basically as dumbed down of a game as it gets.

it sells, it's easier, it doesn't need much though and planning
why think about a way to naturally guide the player to his destination, when you can have a glowing waypoint and an NPC telling you what to do. and then also make the level super linear so that even the soccer moms that never held a Controller in their hands can follow.


publishers don't want well designed games, they want inoffensive games that any casual can finish easily without ever getting stuck

 

[samoilaaa]

it's easier to make a super dumbed down design, that is simple and less interactive.

that's why.
the average player doesn't care, see how God of War Ragnarök gets praised to high heavens being basically as dumbed down of a game as it gets.

it sells, it's easier, it doesn't need much though and planning

but where is ur ambition , as a human to constantly make something better ? Man i remember when devs used to make games because they wanted to make games , push the technology forward , bring their ideas to life

And after they released a game they didnt say " lets make a sequel with slightly better graphics " , they were thinking "how can i make this better , how much can i raise the bar ? "

 

[01011001]

but where is ur ambition , as a human to constantly make something better ? Man i remember when devs used to make games because they wanted to make games , push the technology forward , bring their ideas to life

And after they released a game they didnt say " lets make a sequel with slightly better graphics " , they were thinking "how can i make this better , how much can i raise the bar ? "

there's always phases with entertainment.
movies, comic books, they all go though phases.
that's where the terms Bronze Age, Silver Age, Golden Age and Platinum Age in relation to comic books comes from.

we are currently in a phase of extreme homogenisation. profits are massive but so are costs of making AAA games.
Publishers don't risk anything if the production cost is too high.

everything needs to be easily digestible by the masses. it needs to be a guaranteed success, and how do you guarantee success? make sequels, make the games as similar to other successful games as possible.



edit: reminds me of this old Red Letter Media (Previously Recorded) video... this kind of design really started last gen, which is when they made this video which is kinda about modern AAA gamedesign. not specifically about leveldesign, but that is if course part of it.



Follow the spreadsheed, and the spreadsheet says make everything as dumb as possible

 

[theStartupSound]

but where is ur ambition , as a human to constantly make something better ? Man i remember when devs used to make games because they wanted to make games , push the technology forward , bring their ideas to life

And after they released a game they didnt say " lets make a sequel with slightly better graphics " , they were thinking "how can i make this better , how much can i raise the bar ? "

The people talking at GDC are the ones, who strive for making things better, but the budget and strategy decisions are made higher in hierarchy, where the numbers in Excel are more interesting than actual better games.

Surely, lazy devs exist also, but it is often more of a management decision, to make things more efficient to make.