Level Design Knowledge Base

[seir]

Hi fellow Interlopers!
I'm making a Level Design Wiki-based knowledge base on my own. Here's how it looks like:

http://level-design.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

Yet there are two pages ready. A page about the Dominants and the Composition:

http://level-design.org/wiki/index.php? ... :Dominants
http://level-design.org/wiki/index.php? ... omposition

Let me know if you like it!

Cheers!
Matt

[marnamai]

I approve of this

[Dr Evil]

Looking good so far

[Syphon]

Awesome! Both articles seem top notch (I'll read them thoroughly when I get off of work this evening)

How will you ever have the time to write all this? It's a book!

Are you looking for contributors? If yes, I would like to volunteer.

I graduated on the subject on env. storytelling last year and wrote an article about it on my portfolio as an example of my work.

[zombie@computer]

The post below reflects my opinion about the subject. Please do not regard it as a commentary on the useful/lessness of your site and its information; I think its a great resource for those who seek it. However, i do want to convey some concerns.

I always fear these types or resources because it makes an art (level/game/environment) design into a science. This is not bad, per sé, as there is quite some science behind it. However, I believe that whatever constitutes as inspiration is so much more important than the science behind it, especially to those who design for fun. I would never read a lengthy documentation like this, simply because reading through it takes a lifetime, and I would much rather use the time to create the environment itself.

To what extent are some of the things you describe obvious, i wonder? 'You need to tell a story with your environment'? [edit: not from your site, but more a general remark of similar sites]. Jeez, I could have told you that the first second I was able to speak the words. I doubt anyone who has played a single player shooter would not be able to come up with that. Do we really need to explain obvious ideas on design to this detail? When I read sites about design in general that do not go into technical details, I am often left wondering what i actually learnt. For instance, there are endless streams of sites detailing how one should put the golden ratio in paintings and such, and how existing paintings already have that, but does that really improve the art? Personally, I doubt it. The same goes for level design. I am sure I am not the only one that designs a level around a certain story with accompanying environment, not a certain theory about placing eyecatchers at a certain spot in the center of the level according to the ying yang fen shoe golden ratio. I place the eyecatcher where the story demands it and where my inspiration allows creating the environment around it to be a believable location. I think this kind of freedom allows for much better environments and designs that the endless theories that may support it.

I find these things quite similar to the endless discussions about stories or pieces of art, where experts discuss how the blue color of a certain flower reflects feelings of the artist or main character, or some other psychological or deeper meaning. Later, when the artist is interviewed about this very subject, he simply stated that he made the flower blue because he had to give the flower a color. Blue was simply the first color that came up...

tldr: don't over-theorize art!

[Major Banter]

Later, when the artist is interviewed about this very subject, he simply stated that he made the flower blue because he had to give the flower a color. Blue was simply the first color that came up...

The artist isn't trying to guide a player through an environment using visual clues. I get your comparison, but I've always maintained that video games do not belong in the same category as standard visual art - they have more in common with books and particularly plays and dramatic performance.

Games are a visual medium, and draw on aspects that owe themselves to film and stills, but their fundamental substance is a 'journey', a task, a win/lose condition that has to be clearly indicated. The artistry is inherent to design and vice versa. It's like engineering - it has to look good and perform well. You can't get lost in a film yelling "where the fuck do I go".

Hell, concentrating on the art makes for beautiful and shit games. Concentrating on the science makes an okay game that looks shit. You do both, because they need to be the same thing.



Incidentally, the greatest writers know precisely why the flower is blue.

[Ade]

My 2 cents:
First article helped me understand why a hl2dm map author was always 2nd best - out of a few reasons, one was that he lacked dominants in some of his maps heh
Now 2nd article got me skimming through the first section while trying to get to the part where I can find out what exactly is (a) Composition! You use a term over and over without explaining it first, which you can imagine, for a noob like me, makes following that entire section pretty hard. And yes it does look kind of lengthy, either keep it simple and well organized, or make 10-20 book chapters that flow well individually but also one after the other. To me the index/main page looks like some random chapter titles without much order for placement and sectioning. For instance, why isn't Work Techniques subsection under Level Design Process section, but in Intro section instead?

don't over-theorize art!

It is my belief that over theorizing and deeper inspection comes from passion, and that can be shared. Art mods and games are not so popular imo since art can be observed and admired but rarely interacted with. So don't think of this as art, unless you are referring to "tha art of storytellin'" through fps games, of course. Some things just work, others don't, unless in under certain circumstances or exceptions. There are ways of doing things, and formulas of success which some have discovered on their own and now the matter of applying those formulas is like a second nature to them. There's nothing wrong with sharing that knowledge so in the end better 'stuff' comes out for the common player, the end-user, and your work can properly be appreciated. I can't imagine someone building something and being ok with most players getting stuck/lost/bored/frustrated beyond belief in the first area and then not being able to discover the rest of the work.

[seir]

Now 2nd article got me skimming through the first section while trying to get to the part where I can find out what exactly is (a) Composition!

Here you go: "Composition is an arrangement of scene elements".

And yes it does look kind of lengthy, either keep it simple and well organized, or make 10-20 book chapters that flow well individually but also one after the other.

Well, I don't actually care about that problem with TLDR syndrome.

To me the index/main page looks like some random chapter titles without much order for placement and sectioning. For instance, why isn't Work Techniques subsection under Level Design Process section, but in Intro section instead?

First of all I want to tell people what is Level Design and who is Level Designer. After that I wanted to explain some game design basics that every level designer should know and follow. It's not specific for project, it's fundamental knowledge that everybody should be aware of. Then you need to know everything about the project you're working and I'm talking about a game, not mod or level. Then you need to know how to start or what are the methods of building levels and how to manage time, company meetings etc. It's in the work techniques. You'll need some theory and what kind of terms or design philosophy you want to follow, I call it "consistent design direction". When you know it you can jump to level production. I've started with defining level goals and directions, layout types etc. With that knowledge you'll be able to prepare own level plan and level design document. In a big production team you'll need that to keep people on the same page. Implementation part is mostly like a "do/don't" of level design. Addendum is a part where I had some thoughts and wanted to share it.

Currently most of the articles are in draft stage, that's why it's not published yet...

don't over-theorize art!

I'm speechless

[Major Banter]

Now 2nd article got me skimming through the first section while trying to get to the part where I can find out what exactly is (a) Composition!

Consider a glossary or index of key words. The wiki format enables you to immediately link to a page summary for each main piece of terminology. A lot of your terms are not necessarily industry standard, or will be unfamiliar to total noobs.

And yes it does look kind of lengthy, either keep it simple and well organized, or make 10-20 book chapters that flow well individually but also one after the other.

Well, I don't actually care about that problem with TLDR syndrome.

As stated, you have the entire wiki format at your bidding - you ideally shouldn't be using overly long articles. Neither should you be blasé and state 'I don't care'. If this is supposed to be a resource (and it clearly is, it's superbly written with some excellent points) then user friendliness is important. Your ability to organise, present and deliver information is paramount to it actually being used.

To me the index/main page looks like some random chapter titles without much order for placement and sectioning. For instance, why isn't Work Techniques subsection under Level Design Process section, but in Intro section instead?

blah blah

You're writing a wiki, so chronology is a firm second to good formatting; barely anyone reads a wiki 'in order', they jump to what's relevant to them. Master headers need to encompass the relevant stuff, so keep an eye on it. You won't be able to explain the subheadings to every person who visits it.

I know it's under construction, but that front page really is a mess. Consider sub directories - the VDC is a beautiful example of this. Don't overdo the ten thousand individual aspects of a field. You have countless pages in 'Gameplay', and if I forced you to have just 10, think about how you'd compress them into larger pages with sections for each relevant thing. Experiment; learn where to merge pages and where to compress the individual pages onto contents/index pages.

For example, a lot of your emotive stuff (frustration, enjoyment, etc.) should be part of gameplay design pages as a running theme rather than an individual page - why is X fun, why is Y bad? It's a highly subjective and context driven thing, emotion.

Incidentally, have you considered writing a PDF/book instead?

[Ade]

@seir
Yes, thanks, really? I finally got to the part where composition IS explained, but my point was this: because it wasn't explained in the beginning, it made everything til that explanation almost impossible to understand/follow, can you not get the idea without an example? Plus a wiki should be self sufficient, and should not make me google for terms. If you're to introduce and use a term, especially one as important as Composition, please explain it first and foremost.

I don't have a tl;dr syndrome, given the fact that I suggested you write a BOOK instead. A wikipedia is like a collection of books, and that's what I can't be arsed to read, given the fact that you cover only 1 domain. But if it makes you feel better to see me and treat me as inferior, by all means I'm just giving my 2 cents on how to make it more accessible to the masses. No point in spending months writing something to have it be read only by 2 other friends/people.

The Work Techniques was just one example. And I still don't see why the Intro should be almost half as long as the actual process/level design (LD from now on, in this comment), because consider this, even while in the LD stage, you still read first, apply later, but it's going back and forth, reading a section, and applying it, while in the LD stage. If the intro is too long and there's tons of reading with no concurrent application, high chance most of that will not stick and the reader will have forgotten half of it by the time they reach the LD stage, and they will be forced to read intro stuff again. While in the LD stage.

I didn't state "don't overtheorize art", zombie@computer did, I just quoted it to counter argument it... Please read my comments more carefully in the future, or the entire thread that you started, for that matter.

@Major Banter
"terms [...] unfamiliar to total noobs." (not sure who's side you're on after quoting me) I agree, but he DOES get to explain it, just that it should've been from get, imo. And what happens when other pages use that term and link to that page? The first thing on it should be a rough explanation of that term. I guess that's what you were also trying to say.

And thanks for agreeing about the front page. I think this bears the question: has he ever written a wiki before? If not, then he should go by example, the one you provided was I think one of the best. He should also try to consider the feedback - a feedback which I'm guessing he asked for, since he/she started this thread - at least half constructive, cus no one's here to bash such a beautiful project.

Oh and careful about suggesting to write a book instead, he/she might write you off as having the tl;dr syndrome Logic... Fuck it, amirite?

[Major Banter]

To clarify, Ade, I was using your comment in support of your point rather than disputing it. Not quite clear, for which I apologise.

[Ade]

No problem, I guessed as much.

[seir]

Well, it's not a Wiki actually. I use Wiki engine but I called it a Knowledge Base. I did that to avoid comparisons because I don't want to make a page like Wikipedia or like Valve's Wiki. It's not what I want to do. I want to present my workflow and the idea of developing a level for games (not in a modding way but in development studio) but I'll write more about that later in this post.

I have no idea how I could shorten that Composition article. I was thinking about that but I couldn't remove something, everything is important and I suppose it should be on one page. How you would see that article?

Ade: What's your idea on sorting the contents? I see and understand what you mean but I have no idea to solve that problem.

I understand that you could change a bit here and there and the sorting might seem to be messy but that's how I work, it's my workflow and a plan on how to share my workflow. There is no one good way to do it and it doesn't mean that there's only one true way and other are wrong. I think like that because I don't understand what you're trying to say, I don't see the argument that will tell me "Yes, this makes sense and it's very important".

Yes, I've considered writing a book but it's not that easy and not what I want to achieve. Most of the articles are already written in Polish and at the beginning it was a lecture notes I did on some Universities. Right now I want to make a website with that knowledge put together my experience and knowledge.

[Ade]

Well you are using a wiki-like platform, or engine like you call it, so expect the format and linkage to be accordingly, or you will just confuse people.

I never suggested you shorten the Composition article.

If the content is all in your mind, I cannot guess what it is and sort it accordingly. I mean sure, some titles can be descriptive, but others can be misleading or use terms unknown to me or others, so I can't help you there until I see everything down on paper/pages of inet. That's why I said it's sort of like half constructive feedback, because we can state 1 issue but we can't really offer a solution for it.

How you work is irrelevant, the final product and its format is what matters, cus that's what people will be reading. It's like you're in need of an editor hehe. Plus you ask if others can help out, well we don't know which parts of the TOC you can fill in, so others can come and complete the other parts. I guess what I'm trying to say here, first write out in English everything you have, perhaps keeping the article style and not necessarily linking things together or structure them just yet. And you/we/hopefully the community can come and add to it, or complete it, and organize it in the end.

[seir]

Thanks for your feedback. I think that the shape of a database and the order of an articles will be developed together with filling the content of the pages. It's like opening a construction site before everything is done. It shows functionality and you can actually see how it will be working but right now it's a mess. Thanks again and stay tuned, I hope to post more articles soon. Even right now I'm merging few pages into one page (Player's Choice and other related pages that could be merged into one article).