Hardly anything inherent to the design of the levels, save the occasional corridor, clues the player in on what he or she must do and how it can be accomplished. Unguided by any reference-able movie scenes, UI, map, or other such objective markers, players are left to fend for themselves. The result here is incomprehensible, often unplayable level design. Here the developers had to invent original environments whole-cloth, yet kept the same approach as their previous title for the design. Moving on to perfect dark, a game which has levels that are not based on any movie set or film scene. Don't get me wrong - some of these levels have wonderful little details sprinkled throughout that are entertaining to rummage through - but in terms of supporting the game's mechanics, these levels fail big time. This is bad, unreadable level design - plain and simple. You can argue the case, as some have, that this approach is more realistic, but in a game where you're supposed to be emulating the feeling of being a competent and suave spy, groping empty areas for objective markers doesn't really leave one with a sense of command. Such levels as Statue, Streets, Surface 2, and Caverns leave the player fumbling around in the dark for what amateur players can potentially be hours as there is nothing inherent in the environments' structure that informs players as to where they should go, what they are supposed to do, and how they should do it. Now, take levels that, while based on sets from the film, are forced to improvise and fill in the blanks a lot more as the movie scenes leave gaps in the environment's logic. These aforementioned levels work well because they play off the logic of the film, and unsurprisingly they are arguably the most fun and repeatable missions in the game. Silo works similarly for different reasons - silo functioned as the test level used back when the game was being made as a rails shooter and thus is impossible to get lost in. In levels such as the dam, runway, facility, and archives, Rare's job was simply to fill in the spaces the movie left out - leading to environments that were somewhat non linear but didn't totally sacrifice readability. Levels based off scenes that are explained in the logic of the film (Bond runs through the gate, across the dam, jumps off), tend to flow nicely. This approach works to a certain extent in Goldeneye because part of what players are expecting is a faithful recreation of the movie's sets. Sounds like a novel approach right? Goldeneye in particular was praised for this method because the technique tended to yield "realistic" feeling environments consisting of useless empty rooms like the kind you'd expect to find in a real building. However, there are some major issues with the latter game in the spiritual duo that I believe are worth paying some attention to.Īs recounted by Rare employees, the level design approach to both games was thus: artists were put in charge of creating interesting spaces - nothing more - that would later be populated with objectives, objects, and baddies. A lot of my formative years are coated in blocky shooter nostalgia, and let me say that the multiplayer modes of both games (especially Dark's) still kick serious ass. Ok, so clickbaity title aside, let it be said that I'm a long time Goldeneye - Dark fan, having played both the originals and the remastered versions to death.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |