Posted this in a previous thread I'd made, but nobody really noticed, so I'll just make a new thread and soak up the -rep :P

Here's a very rough build of the level I've been working on for a retro FPS. There's not much to see, but I'm feeling a little unsure of the direction I'm going and am just looking for whatever feedback you guys might have.

http://ironsnowflakes.blogspot.com/2016/03/super-rough-level-design-build.html

A couple of people already mentioned that the movement speed is a little too fast and the character landing sound is awful. Also, apparently I forgot to implement "escape," so you'll have to alt-f4

Really specifically looking for advice from anyone with level design experience, and/or a lot of experience with older FPSs.

I have 0 level design experience. I'm currently playing trough Heretic if that helps!

Anyway, specifically, three nitpicks:
When you go out of the starting area and to the right, you're being lead by coins towards a pillar. When you go around said pillar, you see a wall. Then, only when you step closer to inspect that wall, you notice it's actually not a wall but a passage. It could stand being highlighted - a single torch inside perhaps, which would solve nitpick no. 2, which is that after entering this passage, you can't see shit. Alternatively put two torches around the entrance or lead player trough the second path via coins and keep this one as a secret.

The third nitpick is the weird ambient lightning at the last room which then leads to nothingness and passage leading from it. What was the purpose of this? Red light set an ominous mood, which then turned into a feeling of standing at traffic lights with the sudden appearance of green light coming out of nowhere.

Anyway, I think that's about all that can be said about the little piece you showed. I think the large room where two passages from the beginning meet could be a bit more complex than a box with raised platform (room beneath the platform where baddies and/or goodies can hide and you will only really spot it coming from the 'secret' passage perhaps? Make the room not be a box? Round, hexagon, any more complex shape would do it) Obviously, you need more decorations. I like how spaces were partitioned by stairs or hallways, and that you tried to make every hallway and every room that hallway lead to distinct in some way (slope, shape, color I guess) - I'd just, again, add more complexity like a wall being crumbled on the side with a little space inside to provide cover from a monster which is suddenly around the corner, stuff like that.

I love the talisman. Is it a shotgun/machine gun? And the sound effects are badass. Shooting the handgun is pretty satisfying too, by the way.


Edit: Made a bunch of edits. Re-read to find them - or not :-P

See, that's the concern I have. I feel like the level is both too complicated/confused and too bland at the same time. I'm not sure that filling up areas with scenerey or clutter is the answer, though. Quake and Doom both managed to be interesting throughout with simple environments. That's what I'd like to do.

Some of the problem is probably that I just need more experience doing levels. Currently I have trouble coming up with anything other than "square room, hallway, square room, hallway."

Yeah, the Totem is a shotgun/machinegun combination :) Oh, also, Heretic is freaking awesome :)

I'll probably be playing some of it later tonight. I've been playing older FPSs like mad for reference. I'll probably be able to glean more now that I've actually tried designing a level, too.

It's sort of a combination of both I'd say. Like take a look at the first thing you see when you boot up Doom, right?
What you see is very clear and there's zero confusion
- you can see the baddies that you, however, can't shoot straight away.
- you can immediately see where to go, your goal is very efficiently highlighted
- To make the room not look like an empty box, there's the elevated staircase (that also puts the hallway right in the golden ratio) and two pillars which obscure most of your vision, concealing that the rest of the room is actually not that interesting
- There's a secret right behind the player, but it doesn't actually add to the immediate complexity of the scene - it's completely obscured from vision

I find that studying photography and correct framing can help to create some nice scenes - the first impression player gets will always be the most powerful one. Perhaps if I entered your box with railing and the elevated area from a corner instead of one of the straight walls so that it connects to the room at an angle (which would make it break pattern and look ... crooked?) and the elevated platform was a bit lower with staircase right in front of me right upon entering, it would immediately look more busy. Cut the corners a bit and viola, you have a scene which is a bit more immediately pleasing. Also, when replaying the classic shooters, every time you enter new area, make vigorous notes and try to find patterns.

See, I'm full of advice for having zero experience with level design :-P I enjoy analyzing things

Hmm, ok this all sounds really useful. Do you have any suggestions for good "beginner" sources on photography/framing techniques?

Ugh!
No enemies, broken level design and graphics look like out of the 90s. Would not recommend. 2 pixels out of 7.

;)

Apart from that, you have to think about the purpose of the room. Why is it there? Is it an arena, a connector, a puzzle, a challenge, or a choice room? When you know what the room is supposed to do, then you can design around it.
Personally, I am not a fan of empty space. Rooms and hallways that are dead ends, should have at least something in it. A lot of games do that. They have short hallways that just end or rooms that have neither supplies nor secrets. Most of the time, both are too small to give me a sense of grandeur, too straightforward for a maze and too unrewarding for exploration.
And now that I mention mazes. How tubular do you want to make your maps? How much maze should it be? Are there several ways to progress through a level? Are there bottlenecks that force you through specific hallways?

Hmm, ok so you're saying it's best to first think of the level (or area you're currently working on) in terms of its practical purpose, then it's easier to figure out the aesthetics once you have that mental "box" established to work in? That makes sense to me. I guess my question would be how you'd go about deciding the purpose a room serves. Or, put another way, how you decide on a practical layout for a level? Do you just connect a bunch of different puzzle/arena/choice/whatever rooms together? Or is there more to it?

I'd like the game to be linear-ish, but not really linear in the modern sense where you're just traveling in a straight line from beginning to end. Ya know, like Id games or Build Engine games. So there will likely be multiple paths, but I don't want the player to spend hours lost in mazes.

Romero once said that after a lot of trial and error he learned that every time he felt the need to change color or texture, he instead changed vertical level.

I'm replying without looking at your work. These are some general thought from someone who get lost easily in 3D shooters.

I think it helps if there is a theme in regions of the level. Something that can be used to "adjectivate" regions of a large level. For example, the yellow area vs the green area, the wide spaces vs the narrow passages, the area with the crates, the area with the pillars, the area outside, the area with the big windows... this way I can more easily narrow down where I am, and I can keep a more clear, high-level mental map.

Also, I think we are so used to navigate spaces that are made to be useful and make use of the available area, that I find "sparse levels" a bit more confusing.

"Rational levels" mostly define a space and try to subdivide them into usable rooms. Wasted space is bad, so if you perceive an empty area surrounded by rooms you can visit, you assume there is some way to get there somehow.

"Sparse levels" look more like they were "tunnelled". You get a long corridor with no obvious reason to be there. Corridors connect different rooms. You cannot "guess" or "feel" the level. Everything seems arbitrary instead of functional. I notice an empty space somewhere in the level. Is there a way to access it? Is it a secret area? Or did the author simply not used it? Why have two doors next to each other when one is enough? Why have a pillar in the centre of the room? (to hide monsters behind, that's why!)
Such levels can be made and may be fun to play, as long as the player knows what to expect, meaning that thematically they should distance themselves from the "rational levels" that reflect our reality.

One thing I just thought of is that a slow shift from "rational" to "sparse" levels could be used to induce a sense of "oddness" about the environment. It slowly makes less sense. Angles are not exactly 90 degrees, room disposition seems less predictable, proportions start to look strange.
If you really want to show a trip to madness, you could throw the player into a non-eucledian space! ]:-) (oh, I'm so evil!) But I think no one was insane enough to design such a 3D engine.

Good luck on your project.

What is the flow supposed to be like? Is it supposed to be a fast game? A slow one? Depending on your answer, you have to connect similar rooms to similar rooms. The changes should be like a gradient. That way you preserve the flow. Noone likes the forced stealth part in an action game. Even if you think the game is too repetitive, a sudden change in the flow takes more people out of the game than it breaks boredom.
Another thing is, how much skill scaling does your game allow. Can your levels be cleared fast with precise movements or do you have to slow down all the time because you run into walls and opstacles? As I understand it, alot of players value the fast paced action in Quake and that their skills directly scale into a faster clearing speed.

Frankly, I think you should make gameplay your main focus, before you worry about visual aesthetics. Because of that, I'd recommend you look at some actual level design tutorials, more than anything else. Just fire up your search engine of choice, and I'm sure you can find something on the subject.

Oh yeah, and I agree that playing and analyzing the old classics seems like a good idea.

Also, don't forget to playtest your level. In particular, you should try to do things like go out of bounds (for example, by going through a crack in the geometry in a corner) or break the level.

Don't forget that, depending on the game engine, it may be possible to do tricks like rocket jumping (launching a rocket at your feet to be blown into the air by an explosion). That may lead to skips you didn't intend. (On the other hand, sometimes it's nice to leave a shortcut in, especially if it requires some skill to access.)

You can't seperate gameplay and aesthetic design, though, because they influence each other. Not just in the finished product, but also during the development workflow. If you try focusing all on one or all on the other first, you're going to end up with problems down the road.

Movement is pretty fast, but depending on the game that might not be a bad thing.
There isn't much to see yet, but I think scaling everything up slightly might be better.
Everything seems rather small to me.
And I dislike the tilting when strafing, that just feels weird to me.
Most of that feedback isn't level related though.

True, just don't focus too much on the latter, especially while the level(s) and game are still in their early stages of development. Either way, I still recommend you look up some online tutorials or even books on the topic, since they should cover all relevant aspects. And, again, analyze those classic games which are still being praised for their level design, especially those close to the type of game you're trying to build. Doom should be a good start for FPS style games.