OMCIFER'S PROFILE
Omcifer
0
Search
Filter
Dungeon Design
I realize that there are varying degrees of linearity, but I'm primarily lambasting more of the textbook linearity that doesn't feature branch-offs or other quasi-non-linear features. Most games feature at least a modicum of exploration and this definition of "linear" typically exists only in theory, but I thought that I'd lay it out just to emphasize that it's important to implement divergence.
In reference to the first comment on battles, I agree wholeheartedly that dungeons should be the centerpiece of many great RPGs, and not to derail the topic, but I feel that a lot of battle systems in many indie games are kind of crude or pointless and feel more like tacked-in filler content than something that requires careful thought and preparation. Tossing that aside, since the focus is on dungeon design, I'm tuning in to read more on dungeon structure later when it's out here.
In reference to the first comment on battles, I agree wholeheartedly that dungeons should be the centerpiece of many great RPGs, and not to derail the topic, but I feel that a lot of battle systems in many indie games are kind of crude or pointless and feel more like tacked-in filler content than something that requires careful thought and preparation. Tossing that aside, since the focus is on dungeon design, I'm tuning in to read more on dungeon structure later when it's out here.
Dungeon Design
This article contains some useful tidbits of advice, including adhering to a consistent theme and planning out the dungeon logistics. I will admit, though, that I was half-expecting to read more on the theory of proper dungeon design as opposed to the process, e.g. how layout affects the dungeon, weaving puzzles and other features in, etc. but this is most likely more on my part than yours.
Also,
Ex. battle>puzzle>reward, is a good set of 3 different content types. It challenges the hero/player physically (battles) and mentally (puzzles) and rewards them afterwards for their efforts, which positively conditions them into doing the same thing again. Using the prize of chests as an incentive for players to complete challenging tasks.
I don't know if this is a matter of phrasing, but the player shouldn't face physical challenges in the game, it should all be a mental process. On that note, a dungeon that's void of puzzles could slide MORE SO as long as the battles encourage proper preparation and choice of execution to succeed; otherwise, it's a mindless enter-key spamfest that far too many games are afflicted with. I actually feel that dungeon design is the meat and potatoes of the game, so I don't entirely advocate this.
I don't know, I personally find this type of design to be frustrating. I realize that this is subjective, but if the player is led astray by dead paths too often, they will probably begin to become annoyed and tired of playing. This isn't entirely in a vacuum and the less-beaten path can be reinforced through rewards, but too much pure vanity just isn't something that I'm fond of. I think that path intersection as opposed to linearity is important because it's conducive to gameplay diversity and, consequently, enhances the player's individual experience. If you're striving for realism, this is an alternate option. There's rarely a single path to a location in actuality, and it's better than dead end paths that don't lead to anything. Additionally, people tend to prefer the discovery process, which is another nail to linearity. If you tell someone that they only have to get from point A to point B with no hint of exploration in the middle, chocked with boring battles, they're likely to just stop playing all together.
Also,
Ex. battle>puzzle>reward, is a good set of 3 different content types. It challenges the hero/player physically (battles) and mentally (puzzles) and rewards them afterwards for their efforts, which positively conditions them into doing the same thing again. Using the prize of chests as an incentive for players to complete challenging tasks.
I don't know if this is a matter of phrasing, but the player shouldn't face physical challenges in the game, it should all be a mental process. On that note, a dungeon that's void of puzzles could slide MORE SO as long as the battles encourage proper preparation and choice of execution to succeed; otherwise, it's a mindless enter-key spamfest that far too many games are afflicted with. I actually feel that dungeon design is the meat and potatoes of the game, so I don't entirely advocate this.
Liberty*Followed by picture references*
One thing I actually talked about with someone recently was how I tend to create paths that lead no-where while they prefer to make mostly straight paths. I like me some dead-ends or just off-shoots of the main passage way through the dungeons. This is because I like to make exploration a priority and getting lost a possibility and going the wrong way quite likely - it can lead to unexpected benefits.
I don't know, I personally find this type of design to be frustrating. I realize that this is subjective, but if the player is led astray by dead paths too often, they will probably begin to become annoyed and tired of playing. This isn't entirely in a vacuum and the less-beaten path can be reinforced through rewards, but too much pure vanity just isn't something that I'm fond of. I think that path intersection as opposed to linearity is important because it's conducive to gameplay diversity and, consequently, enhances the player's individual experience. If you're striving for realism, this is an alternate option. There's rarely a single path to a location in actuality, and it's better than dead end paths that don't lead to anything. Additionally, people tend to prefer the discovery process, which is another nail to linearity. If you tell someone that they only have to get from point A to point B with no hint of exploration in the middle, chocked with boring battles, they're likely to just stop playing all together.
Pages:
1