Language…
13 users online:  AmperSam, CroNo, Golden Yoshi, Hammerer, Isikoro, JezJitzu, MorrieTheMagpie, RPG Hacker, signature_steve, sofy lumi, Sparkz314, timothy726, webzinn - Guests: 248 - Bots: 263
Users: 64,795 (2,377 active)
Latest user: mathew

Fuzzy terms: Define "Level Design" For Me

In reality there are a lot of terms and phrases thrown around with muddy definitions, and this causes confusion and misunderstanding. If a complex concept cannot be easily explained in different terms, then it's useless for discussion and debate. "Freedom" is an obvious one in real life politics. "Vanilla" is well known to be one around here, and I think "Level Design" is one too.


So, I want to hear some definitions from people. Try to explain in a clear and concise manner what you think "level design" is, preferably without using the term "design" at all.

- Circular definitions that can't explain what the term means without referring to itself (ie, "it is what it is") won't cut it. Level design is far too complicated a concept to be something axiomatic that can't be explained any other way.
- Don't say even more vague things like "it's whatever is fun" either, since that's going backwards (explain what you think is fun in that case).
- Try to keep it in a SMW hacking context. Sure you could copy/paste some dictionary definition you found on google but that would be missing the point.
- Try to give me definitions that can be substituted for "level design" in a sentence so that it will still make sense. IE, if you think part of level design is platform placement, then "level design is important" -> "platform placement is important". This makes statements clearer and less open to misunderstandings, which helps A LOT in discussions.



Personally, I'd define it as the placement of blocks, obstacles, and goals. Blocks being platforms, walls, etc. Obstacles being enemies, pits, munchers, etc. Goals being powerups, coins, collectables, the level end, bosses, etc. The interaction of these three things is "level design", at least in SMW.

Your definition?
Level design is the careful placement of tiles and sprites to create a level that is interesting, fresh, and most of all, fun. A lot of thought must be put into every block and enemy/moving platform, and sometimes even the layers.
Originally posted by ThePat545
Level design is [...] interesting, fresh, and most of all, fun.

Wouldn't that make the term "bad level design" nonsensical?

<hr/>

While I don't disagree with Kaijyuu's definition, here's another angle: Level design is building an environment for the player to interact with the game mechanics.

A well-designed level lets you interact with the game mechanics in a positive way (fun, challenging, naturally progressing, intuitive, innovative), while a badly-designed level fails to give the player a good time interacting (repetitive, frustrating, boring; e.g. flat terrain doesn't give you opportunities to use jumping).

This definition has the advantage that a level's quality depends on the game it's in - a good level in DKC is also more or less a good level in SMW since the mechanics are similar, but it might not be all that good a level in, say, a Sonic game (?). It also reflects the fact that SMWC sees level design as distinct from visuals - in this case, visuals aren't part of level design because changing them doesn't change the environment for interacting with the mechanics.

That sounded a lot clearer in my head, but there you go. #tb{''} (also I've said mechanics enough times for today)


 
Level design is the tool you use to teach the player about the game. Good level design combines good flow and a good use of antepieces to teach in a natural and satisfying way.
I think "level design" focuses on the flow of a level and how to make sure the player can parse each obstacle just quick enough to avoid dangers. The higher the range of players that will find the level fun, combined with the higher the satisfaction, make up level design.

Of course, I'm using some fuzzy words in this definition (flow, fun, satisfaction) but oh well
Level design is either the act of making a level, or in what style a level is made, depending on the context.
*everything stops*
Yeah, that's me. You're probably wondering how I got into this situation...
*cut to next post*
Originally posted by The Koopa Resistance
act of making a level
Quote
what style a level is made

Could you break these down a little bit?

"Act of making a level" could mean literally anything, including drawing graphics, composing music, or even promotion or advertisement. Try to be more specific.
As for style, could you give some examples (particularly examples of good and bad "level design" using this definition)? They can be hypothetical examples and not necessarily existing ones.

Quote
Level design is the tool you use to teach the player about the game. Good level design combines good flow and a good use of antepieces to teach in a natural and satisfying way.

What happens when you're done teaching the player your game's mechanics? Does "level design" cease to exist in a simplistic hack that doesn't have anything new?
By "act of making a level", I meant actually placing things in Lunar Magic. "Good" or "bad" level design really depends on the person. A good example is that while some people think 1F0 is a requirement for good levels, others are extremely tired of it being used over and over, and think all the levels that use it are just bad copies.
*everything stops*
Yeah, that's me. You're probably wondering how I got into this situation...
*cut to next post*
Originally posted by The Koopa Resistance
By "act of making a level", I meant actually placing things in Lunar Magic.

So, positioning of objects/etc. This would exclude aesthetics or new mechanics (like custom blocks/enemies/etc), correct?
Making new graphics would be graphics design, and making new custom enemies/blocks would be enemy or block design, depending on what you made.
*everything stops*
Yeah, that's me. You're probably wondering how I got into this situation...
*cut to next post*
Originally posted by Kaijyuu
What happens when you're done teaching the player your game's mechanics?

Seppuku?
I dunno about you but I much prefer games to give me some time to frolic and play with the mechanics instead of constantly throwing new crap at me. :P
One does not simply "make an level". One does not simply "Place an enemy on the ground".

To create an level is to offer the player an challenge. One that they will experience whether they like it or not. It is not how each element operates, it is how all of them operation in unison. Each level must feature an certain groups of enemies and obstacles. If all of them can be simply jumped over, then the level has failed to challenge the player.

Take a look at the Kaizo hacks, for an example. Each one offers various challenges, with no obstacles easy to pass through. Enemies must be places in such a way that they are able to interfere with the player's progress. Power-ups are an nice touch, but not all of them should be easy to get.

In fact, sometimes you can use power-ups to create new gimmicks. Such as requiring an Fire Flower to melt ice blocks. No matter how puzzle based or obstacle-course based. If an level is too easy, then it is not an level at all.
Level design is the either intentional or unintentional placing of up to but not limited to sprites, objects, music, ASM, and other factors, whether by means of traditional level editors or by more unconventional hacking methods, to either reduce the amount of blank space in the level (commonly known by the more elite hackers as tile 25) or to progressively transform the level into something less like the original Nintendo level that previously occupied it, which, the end goal being, to reduce the amount of blank space and to fill the level with such objects and sprites so much so that the future player of the level could not tell that the original level was either completely blank or an original Nintendo level. Thus, in a sort of Theseus's ship situation, gradually over time, this either intentional or unintentional placing of objects and sprites in the level editor eventually allows one to question whether the level they are playing really is the original Super Mario World or some other hacker's creation, the end goal of level design being, to instill the latter. I hope that makes sense.



In all seriousness, are you just trying to figure out what good level design is? Cause that's fairly simple to define (and much harder to actually do). Make your level enjoyable and fun above all, try to add a bit of your own creativity in there, and that's about it. It is going to be hard to find the perfect definition of a somewhat ambiguous word that probably changes depending on whether it is in the context of hacking or actual video game design.

E: if I had to say a definition I would agree with WYE's the most, but honestly, to say "build an environment for players to interact" is just a fancy way of saying "make a level for players to play", which is basically what level design is.
Originally posted by GbreezeSunset
It is going to be hard to find the perfect definition of a somewhat ambiguous word that probably changes depending on whether it is in the context of hacking or actual video game design.

That is the problem. Ambiguity leads to misunderstanding. The more ambiguous a word or phrase is, the less useful it is, all the way to becoming completely worthless or actively bad to use.

It's easy enough to fix the context issue if you can say the same thing using different words. With a solid understanding of what you mean you can say it in a dozen different ways, after all. It's easy to tell if someone doesn't understand what they're talking about if all they can give are circular definitions.



---------



It seems people are giving mostly the same explanations, which is good. If the phrase is more universally understood than I thought, then I'm happy to be proven wrong.

Anyone out there with a wildly different opinion on what level design is?
Level design is the art of placing course elements in a way that is interesting, engaging, and challenging, for the player to accomplish tasks in. Tasks range from broad things like locating normal and secret exits, to smaller things like gathering powerups and coins.
Design is the unique arrangement of a level's mechanical components (blocks and sprites in this case). It is the intangible element of a level. You can't measure good design or evaluate it without some intrusion of subjectivity and personal preferences. This is why it is a fuzzy term.

I feel this subject has come up from the multiple "design vs. aesthetic" debates that have gone on since the dawn of video games. It's a false dichotomy, in part because it is rare to encounter levels that are masterfully designed while also being aesthetically unpleasant. Usually, you'll see dull levels that don't give you a lot to do, but boast attractive visuals, effects, ASM etc.

I think the best definition in this context is "clearly a lot of thought went into the actual gameplay and a lot of testing was done to ensure it is fun and that it works as intended".
GANYMEDE

Chapter Two: Land of No Shame
Originally posted by Ten
Design is the unique arrangement of a level's mechanical components (blocks and sprites in this case). It is the intangible element of a level. You can't measure good design or evaluate it without some intrusion of subjectivity and personal preferences. This is why it is a fuzzy term.

I feel this subject has come up from the multiple "design vs. aesthetic" debates that have gone on since the dawn of video games. It's a false dichotomy, in part because it is rare to encounter levels that are masterfully designed while also being aesthetically unpleasant. Usually, you'll see dull levels that don't give you a lot to do, but boast attractive visuals, effects, ASM etc.

I think the best definition in this context is "clearly a lot of thought went into the actual gameplay and a lot of testing was done to ensure it is fun and that it works as intended".


I'm not sure why some people think that 1. an amazing level has to have both amazing design and aesthetic and 2. those that only focus on design and no aesthetic don't care about aesthetic.

In actuality there's plenty of designers who are excellent at level design and really do care about how their levels looks visually, but they are not at all artists and barely know how to us yychr. It's hard to find someone who excels at absoltely everything, but there are some (cough worldpeace). I agree wth you though, a good designer puts a lot off thought into their level. Also, that thought should hopefully produce a fun finished product as well.

Also the level design vs aesthetic "debate" is silly. Also, I have seen plenty of levels that were designed well with really silly or plain visuals. Of course, I also like how plain visuals look, but some see that as "not putting in effort".