Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'intensity'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Design
    • Projects
    • Design Discussion
    • Tools & Tutorials
  • Off Topic
    • Games Discussion
    • General Discussion
    • Site Support & Feedback


  • Articles
  • NLD Originals
  • News
  • Projects


  • NLD Dev Blog

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



About Me

Found 5 results

  1. Intro: This is one part in a series of articles that will attempt to explain how I think when I design. The purpose of these articles is not as much to provide a hands-on practical approach – just to explain how I do stuff. Once I finish this series, I’ll focus on some more practical applications of this stuff. (Link to Part 5) Important Points from Previous Articles The Big Principle: A game is fundamentally a conversation between the designer and the player. Principle #1: As a game designer, your job is to ask your players Questions. The players’ job is to answer those questions using the Tools you give them. Archetypes: Very typical examples of one of the extreme boundaries of your game’s design. Setups: Variously-sized groups of Archetypes, all combined together to ask the player a unique Question. Intensity and Ramps This week I’m going to introduce the subjects of “Intensity” and “Ramps,” which I’ll define later on. I’ll be developing these concepts further next week when I talk about how knowing about these helps you decide what Archetypes go in a Setup (see the previous article for more about Archetypes and Setups). Before diving into the guts of this piece, I need to define a couple of terms. Difficulty First off, I’m going to be using the term “Difficulty” a little differently than most people do – and I want to be clear up front that it’s not what I’m talking about when I talk about Intensity. As with everything else in this series, I’m not doing this to imply that my way is somehow better or more correct. It’s just necessary that you understand how I’m using it here to avoid potential confusion. “Difficulty”, as I use it, doesn’t really measure how hard content is for any given player. It measures the difference between players. For example, if you measure, say, how long it takes different players to complete various levels and record how many times they died, you can know whether Level 1 in your game can be said to be objectively harder or easier than Level 1 in another game (at least in terms of those two things you’re measuring). Further, you’d be able to rank the players’ comparative skill in those areas, like with a leaderboard. Difficulty: The objective difference in complexity or required skill between multiple games or players. “Objective difference” is used to mean “the view from outside the player.” It is externally comparative. Difficulty is a very important aspect of game design, and I don’t want you to think I’m ignoring it. In this early-on phase of design, though, I don’t find it particularly useful to think about how objectively hard my content will be. Intensity Early in the design process, I care most about how hard my content will be compared to the content that surrounds it. The word I use for that is “Intensity.” Intensity – The subjective difference in complexity or required skill between different parts of the same game. “Subjective difference” is used to mean “the view from inside the player.” For example, let’s say I created two levels (1 and 2), where the second level was supposed to be more Difficult than the first. A pro gamer, a novice, or my dad would each have different subjective experiences of how hard those levels were, but if I’ve done my job right they would all agree that Level 2 is more Difficult than Level 1. Intensity measures the difference between Level 1 and Level 2 in terms of how hard it was for a given player. Note that Intensity does not compare multiple players or various games to each other – it only takes into account one specific game and one specific player, namely: The player who is currently playing your game. Intensity and Pacing Pacing Pacing is the ratio of Intensity to Rest over the course of a segment of your game. A great example of good pacing can be seen in the recent film Mad Max: Fury Road. Commonly described by reviewers as “a two hour long chase scene” – the movie nonetheless does a masterful job of balancing rest time for the viewers without destroying the forward momentum that makes that movie so great to watch. The two most clever rests I can think of in that movie are: The chase sequence through the crazy tornado storm The part where they get stuck in the mud. Both are action packed and intense, but they mark a clear change of intensity and pace when compared to the surrounding scenes. During the chase through the tornados, the audio fades down and everything seems to move in slow motion. The cars are still moving and getting ripped apart, but the intensity has died down – the viewer gets a rest. The color palette cools down, the action slows,the music ducks itself, and even the carnage shown in this shot feels restful. This keeps the viewers from getting worn out by constant action. In the “stuck in the mud” scene, the color palette changes abruptly to night and the motion of the cars actually stops for a while – but the action goes on. The characters are under threat, need to get out of the mud, and are being chased by an insane person. There’s even a cool explosion during this scene. And nevertheless it acts as a down-pacing moment. It gets you emotionally ready for the action that is to come, and makes that action (when it comes) feel much more intense by comparison. Again the colors cool down. In this scene the main motion of the cars stop while the characters dig it out, but there are still plenty of explosions, cars with tank treads, and gunfire. This is a great example of the application of what I’m going to call “Principle #5”: Principle #5: If it’s always “turned up to eleven,” eleven becomes the new five. (I know I haven’t done Principles 3 and 4 yet, but I HAD to make this one either number 5 or number 11, and 5 was closest. The persons responsible for this decision have been sacked). Intensity is the measure of your content as compared to other content that’s come before or to any future content in your game. This means that if I never change Intensity between the different segments of my game, my game essentially has zero Intensity. Even if objectively the whole game was brutally Difficult, players will not perceive any relative change from one segment to another. Pertaining to games, this teaches us that if you want your players to feel a change in intensity at certain points, you have to let them rest beforehand so the change is noticeable. Going from intensity 5 to intensity 11 is a big jump, but going from 10 to 11 is not. Intensity Ramps Jesse Schell, in his wonderful The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses shares an anecdote about when he learned the importance of pacing. He was working in a performing troupe and had just put on his first show. He went backstage and the head of the troupe, Mark Tripp, told them the show had been good, but not great. Their progression (pacing) had been off: “It’s simple. You need to start with more of a bang — to get their attention. Then you back off, and do something a little smaller, to give them a chance to relax, and get to know you. Then you gradually build up with bigger and bigger routines, until you give them a grand finale that exceeds their expectations.” From this experience, Dr. Schell developed the concept of “Interest Curves:” Since my time at the amusement park, I have found myself using this technique again and again when designing games… The quality of an entertainment experience can be measured by the extent to which its unfolding sequence of events is able to hold a [player’s] interest. The level of interest over the course of the experience can be plotted out in an interest curve. An example graph of what Dr. Schell calls “a successful Interest Curve.” What he calls an “interest curve” I’ve been calling “an intensity ramp” for much of my career. For the purposes of this article series we’ll use my term (to keep it easier for me) but you should know that he’s talking about exactly the same thing I am. Intensity Ramp: The measure of relative intensity and complexity between the beginning of any segment of game content, and the end of it. Intensity ramps commonly start at low intensity and increase over the course of the segment. (Link to Part 7) *Note: This article is published with permission from the author, and in accordance with Creative Commons guidelines. Source: Follow Mike Website: Website: Twitter: Follow Next Level Design Join the Forum: Follow us on Twitter: Discuss on Discord:
  2. IntroductionGame spaces provide a context for the game's rules and systems, and a space for the game agents to perform mechanics. When we go about designing game spaces, sometimes thinking in pure spatial terms clouds what a designer needs to achieve with a certain game space.For FPS games, sitting yourself down with your favorite prototyping tool kit and drawing corridors and rooms is a recipe for disaster. It is difficult to design interesting spatial puzzles when you are creating game spaces using the rules of reality. How many office blocks are fun to navigate?Molecule design is a way of applying graphing theory for concepting and fine-tuning of various types of game spaces. This rational approach to design is a means to design spaces without thinking about the representational elements of space itself. This article still accepts the importance of planar maps; however, we need better tools to help us create these first.This article will examine some useful tools gathered from the field of graphing theory that designers can use to conceptualize various game components. The latter half of this article will examine a real-world application of these tools. By doing so, we will examine how iterations of a level design benefited from this abstracted means of realizing space.The Basics of GraphingGraphing theory is a broad and diverse field of mathematics; however, this article discusses graphs that can explain spatial relationships. Core to graphs that explain spatial relationships are nodes and edges (Figure 1). Nodes can represent game spaces / rooms, pickups, spawn points and AI pathing nodes. Edges define relationships between nodes. Figure 1 Figure 2 is a simple molecule consisting of several nodes, linked by edges. In this example, we have defined a set of tokens around the players spawn point. This is a literal depiction of space using a graphing approach. Nodes become linked by edges, and these define the shortest possible distance between the player and other node. The more powerful a token is, the longer the edge should become.This approach works well for PvP games -- to create a game space with roughly similar distributions of pickups, to achieve game balance. Repeating and rotating a molecule leads to symmetrical distributions throughout the game space. Edges are abstract ways of defining relationships but not necessarily hallways or any other level geometry. To explain this further, we need to look at weighted and directed graphs. Figure 2 We can manipulate the physical appearance of our edges to help communicate different types of relationships between the nodes. In Figure 3, the edge between nodes A and C is thicker than the rest. If we are using graphing theory to create spaces, and the nodes represent particular game spaces, then the larger edge does not imply a bigger space between the two nodes, but rather a more direct route. Figure 3 Figure 4 takes our molecule from Figure 3 and uses weighted edges as a guideline to place out level geometry. In this example, heavy weighted edges create a path between nodes A and C that is direct and unimpeded. Alternatively, the thin edge connecting nodes A and B results in a meandering pathway that is complex in nature. This example shows that edges do not depict geometry, but rather the relationship between nodes. Figure 4 We can further increase the information that an edge communications by adding direction. Figure 5 is an example of a graph that has directed and weighted edges. Figure 5 uses directed and weighted edges to communicate two different ways to get between node A and node B. The thicker edge is more direct than the other. Linking nodes B and C is an indirect one-way gate. The thick edge linking nodes A and C is another one-way gate. The thickness of this edge shows a direct and unimpeded relationship between the nodes. Figure 5 Nodes and edges can represent nearly any feature of game level design. For example, we could use a system whereby the weight of the lines also tells us about the difficulty of getting between nodes. By using edges to depict vertical space, we could say that node C is the highest point of the map. Node C is then transitive in the sense that it can only be accessed from node B. The one-way direction between nodes B and C might be achieved by having a "jump pad" at node B, pointing towards node C, but not in the opposite direction. It is really at the discretion of the designer and their team to define a key for their particular molecule system.To further explain the concept of using spatial molecules to create play spaces, let us consider one example molecule and how it should and should not be implemented. The molecule represented in Figure 6 is a simple spatial molecule that defines a linear level progression, suitable for single player type maps. Weighted edges have not been used in this example; however directed edges have been used to create interesting spatial puzzles. Figure 6 Figure 7 is an example of what not to do with a spatial molecule. The reason to use a molecule-based approach is to free your creative process from thinking in purely spatial terms, and instead think about creating interesting spatial relationships. Although the planar map in Figure 7 does follow the spatial relationships of the molecule, it is a boring, linear space.There are also a number of other flaws that demonstrate why designing maps from a planar perspective is problematic. First, the linear, room-by-room layout of the map is a direct product of drawing maps out in planar space. When your imaginative space is two-dimensional, your maps will be two-dimensional also. As such, there are no interesting vertical spaces and, more importantly, the objective is not clearly visible from the beginning of the map. Figure 7 Figure 8 is a better implementation of the same spatial molecule. This example treats each node as a "play space" and uses the edges of the molecule to define how these play spaces can interact with each other. Below is a hypothetical playthrough:In this example, the player starts on a ledge overlooking a valley (node A). Beside them they can see play area F, a large manmade structure towering over the environment. This is the final objective and its size and scale immediately compels the player to wonder how they can get inside the structure. The player notices that the entry to the tower is locked, but they can see another structure in the distance, a large pyramid in section E of the map. The pyramid has a grand entryway that draws the player's attention -- it is the only other major point of interest in the landscape and as such acts to draw the player towards it. Between their starting point at section A and the pyramid, the player sees a number of obstacles that they need to overcome: a large wall, a bridge with a closed gate and a canyon filled with water. The player has time to survey the landscape from their elevated position and gain situational awareness. From node A the player begins to plan their route. The player jumps down from the elevated platform of node A -- this is a one way gate. In section B, they need to make their way to the open gate. Initially they will be drawn to the bridge that crosses the canyon, but they soon realize that it is blocked off and can only be open from the other side. Close to the bridge, the player notices that there is a section of rocks which they can use to jump into the river below without taking damage. Once in the river, they follow it downstream towards a large open section. Here the player finds a set of stairs that will take them up to the plateau containing the pyramid. Once inside the pyramid, there is an underground road which links back to the objective at section F. This road will collapse behind them once they get close to section F so it acts as a one-way gate. The hidden room, "a", is connected to F and to E, however it is also a one-way gate and can only be accessed from F. The room will flood once entered, causing it to be blocked off from F, and forcing the player back up into section E. Section F is the objective, and once inside, the player can continue onwards. Note that because section A is a one-way gate and section F is closed off, the player should not be allowed to return back into the open-area space. Figure 8 Figure 9 is another interpretation of the same molecule, this time using a more traditional room-based approach. In this playthrough, the player starts in section A, a large room with two doors, one open and one closed. The player goes through the only open door into a large arena section -- B. There is a door in this room, but it is blocked in such a way that the player knows that it is broken and they cannot get through it. Inside B are a number of containers that the player needs to jump between in order to get out of the room. Above this tall room is a gantry, suspended high above the floor. The player can also see a room overlooking the arena -- section E. The player jumps from container to container, slowly exploring the vertical space. Once they are in the highest position they enter a network of small service tunnels (section C) that gradually descend. After navigating the tunnels, the player drops down into an outdoor section -- section D. From here, they can go between D and E via the stair. Once inside E, they can cross the suspended bridge that they saw earlier to their objective. On the way to F, they notice a pickup, situated on a container that they previously could not access via section B. If they player decided to jump down onto this container, then they need to backtrack via, B, C, and D. Figure 9 Figure 8 and Figure 9 demonstrate how creating a planar map based on a molecule can be an excellent way to creatively problem-solve spatial design. This method of concepting forces the designer to create interesting spatial options at the planar map stage of level design. From my own experiences, designing levels starting at the planar stage more often than not leads to boring, linear progressions which are a consequence of trying to create interesting 3D spaces in a purely 2D creative space. More Advanced Toolsets Now that the basics of graphing theory have been discussed, it is time to move on examine some of the tools that designers have at fingertips when going about designing game spaces. It is important to note that these are just some of the concepts available for designers. As this article is appropriating some of these ideas, there are instances where it is necessary to deviate from some of the pure mathematical interpretations of these concepts. This article will explore the following graphing concepts: • Dominion Theory • Steiner Points • Spanning Trees Dominion / Domination Theory Domination Theory is a way to understand how nodes can have an area of effect (AOE) and how this AOE might overlap with other nodes. This tool is especially useful to analyze your existing maps from the perspective of player experience. Using this method, each node represents "zones of play" and the intensity of play that happens within each space. This notion of "zones of play" is something that was originally explored during the design of Half-Life and is referred to as "Experiential Density". Experiential Density is a term coined by Valve's designers during the creation of Half-Life. The concept refers to play experience being distance-based, rather than time-based. The basic concept is that a player should always opt-in to the next section of the play experience. They should be given as much time as they need in order to accumulate loot or simply explore before being placed in a situation of high intensity. Figure 10 Figure 10 is an example taken from Half-Life 2 that demonstrates how dominion theory can be used to promote Experiential Density. In this map, we have three distinct section of high-intensity play represented by nodes, A, B, and C. The area of effect around the nodes is meant to represent the intensity of play in each of these sections. The greater the AOE, the greater the challenge posed to the player. If we are designing with Experiential Density in mind, then we can use Dominion to ensure that we are not forcing the player into consecutive, high intensity play zones. Quite literally we are looking at molecule design to ensure that we have enough emotional "cool-down" time for the player between zones. I like to think of these cool-down zones as being similar to dynamics in music. In his book The Clarinet and Clarinet Playing, musician and author David Pino sums this notion up well: Think of it this way: If you look out from the shore upon a great expanse of ocean, you may become very quickly bored. If however the ocean is enlivened by the sudden appearance of an interesting ship, the view is more likely to hold your attention. Similarly, if your view is suddenly filled with hundreds of ships, not any single one of them will hold interest for very long. The same principle holds for the performance of music: If the listener perceives no subtleties he becomes bored; if he detects nothing but subtleties he becomes disorientated and bored... the most important element in any piece of music is its rhythmic flow. To better demonstrate how Dominion Theory works, let us use the same example from Half-Life 2, but let's intentionally break the Experiential Density (Figure 11). In Figure 11, the overlapping play sections are represented by the overlapping, red AOEs. From a player experience perspective, this is like trying to read a book with no punctuation. The game experience lacks a satisfactory blend of emotional states as the player "detects nothing but subtleties," in Pino's words. Figure 11 This map, therefore, is a prime candidate to apply dominion theory to in order to solve the problem of Experiential Density. Depending on the amount of cool-down space you wish the player to have you can adjust your rules for "dominion-overlap" to suit. For example, you could remove overlapping nodes from your molecule so there was no-overlap (as per Figure 10) or you could revise your zones of play so that the play intensity is lower, yet more frequent (as in Figure 12). Figure 12 From a level concepting perspective, Dominion can also be used to define a "spawn exclusion zone" or any other type of "exclusion zone." An exclusion zone can define an area in which something should not happen -- i.e., there should not be an overlap with the dominion of another node. In this application of Dominion Theory, a node can represent a pickup or a player spawn point. The red AOE is therefore a visual representation of the spatial metric that you have decided to use to represent minimum distances to a spawn event. Figure 13 is an example of using Dominion to define an exclusion zone. The node represents an actual player spawn point, but could be any game token. The red AOE around the node is a visual representation of the minimum distance that another spawn can occur. For example, if we are working within the confines of UDK, then we might say that based on the size of our map, each spawn point must be at least 1024UU away from another if it occupies the same vertical space. The rules of your dominion zones are flexible; however, for this example, the rule is that no other spawns are to happen within the Dominion Zone -- at least from a planar perspective. Figure 13 Figure 14 is a dominion problem that needs to be resolved. The problem may be a result of overlapping spawns or pickups that are too close. We can remove the overlap in dominion by placing these nodes further apart or by simply using level geometry to mitigate overlap, as in Figure 15. Figure 14 Figure 15 It is important though to use common sense when implementing Domination Theory. Once you start to add in level geometry, you are adding another layer of complexity to your designs that will call for revising some of your rules. Figure 16 In this example, Figure 16, I have used the spawn exclusion system to spread spawn locations in an asymmetric environment. One thing to note is that spawn point 3 has been intentionally moved further away from spawns 1 and 2. The reason for this is due to the fact that spawns 1 and 2 have fewer approach vectors -- i.e. the player can see any oncoming enemy in their view frustum upon spawn. Spawn point 3, on the other hand, has a wide arc of approach vectors which the player cannot possibly cover within the same view frustum, hence the need to compensate by moving it further away from the other spawn points. You can apply this same spawn exclusion system to other pickups -- the more powerful the pickup, the larger the spawn exclusion should be. As mentioned earlier though, level geometry and other factors such as pickups and the player's ability to move within the game space will necessitate the use of more sophisticated analytical tools -- namely Spanning Trees and Steiner Points. Using Graphing Theory to Understand Player Choice and Strategy All game levels provide some type of spatial problem-solving puzzle. These puzzles take a number of forms, but one type of puzzle which can be improved via the application of graphing theory are puzzles relating to optimum movement strategies seen in all well-designed deathmatch style maps. Players thrive on choice; however, too much choice can be just as bad as too little choice. Further to this, players take great pride in achieving victories via the execution of "good" strategic choices. So far we have used graphing theory to examine the construction of play spaces; however, graphing theory is especially useful when we examine our level designs with human cunning and strategy as our primary concern. The principles of Steiner trees, spanning trees, and maximum and minimum cutting are integral to understanding these human factors. Figure 17 Figure 17 is an example of a hypothetical level. Each node, designated A-H, represents a different type of play space, and each edge represents how many different ways a player can move from space to space. Note that each edge does not represent a corridor, but rather the player's options. The length of the edge is short or long based on how complex that particular route is -- i.e., the longer an edge, the more time it should take to use that option. In the case of Figure 17, each space (node) has between three to five different options for the player to consider when exploring the space. The graph also communicates how the player needs to move through spaces in order to traverse the map. Figure 18 Spanning trees can be used to define the most optimal connection of nodes in a graph. This tool can also be useful when we are trying to understand player behavior in a map and look for aspects of the design that may be unfair or unbalanced. We can use spanning trees such as those seen in Figure 18 to help disperse item pickups, define spawn points, and place level geometry to help counteract any significantly overpowered (OP) movement strategies that might emerge in a PvP map. Although mapping out specific permutations of the optimal movement strategy for a level is a good way to start defining your play spaces, it is essential that we give further consideration for players' desire to exercise cunning and emergence. A good example of this point is considering the pride that people (not just players) take in identifying shortcuts. A shortcut is a set of strategic choices that sit outside of the norm. Players will look for opportunities like this in any game environment and their discovery and exploitation of this can be very satisfying on an emotional level. A great way of planning for an understanding this behavior comes from the theory of Steiner trees. A Steiner tree is a type of spatial problem that looks for the shortest interconnection between a number of nodes. The example that Raph Koster gives in his "Games are Math" presentation is a good way to understand the application of Steiner trees in games. In his presentation, Koster states "If you have three nodes and you need to create the shortest possible route between them, what is the shortest amount of edges required?" Koster states that most people will answer something similar to Figure 19. Figure 19 The answer to this problem is slightly more devious, as it requires adding another node in the puzzle -- a Steiner point. Via introducing the Steiner point in Figure 20, we have created the most optimal solution to this puzzle. Steiner points and the edges that they create can be treated just like any other type of graph. In the context of games, we can use weighted and directed edges to help define how a Steiner point might be a height element of a map or may be another one-way gate, like a teleporter or jump pad. Figure 20 A Steiner Point is a shortcut. It is that element of a level's design that players will seek out in order to exploit. The secret for level designers is to make the Steiner points in your map seem less obvious than the spanning tree routes. Borderlands is a good example of this. Within the maps, spanning tree paths are clearly defined and for the most part, appear as clearly defined paths and gantries. Steiner points exist within the game in the form of height elements which allow the player to skip large sections of the spanning trees by jumping down to certain parts of the map, therefore avoiding large path traversal. Krom's Canyon in Borderlands is just one example where the player can jump down from raised platforms to quickly move to another point in the map, therefore creating a Steiner point (see Figure 21). Figure 21 Figure 22 (taken from Krom's Canyon above) is an example of how spanning trees and Steiner points work from a level design perspective. In this example, in order for the player to get from node A to node F, they must enact a spanning tree solution. This relationship is represented in the level design by a set of gradually ascending platforms which are interconnected via bridges. A number of bonus items are implemented in this section of the map via Steiner points. Figure 22 In Figure 23, two Steiner points have been added. Although there are actually several other Steiner points in this spatial molecule, these nodes are pickups placed on high platforms, only accessible from the nodes above them. As such, not only are these considered to be Steiner points as they offer the player a shortcut, but they are important points of interest for the player that allow them to explore the environment as a spatial puzzle. Figure 23 Figure 24 expands this particular section of play into an even more defined molecule and adds two other major Steiner nodes that show how the player can traverse the space when they are either ascending or descending. Figure 24 Now that we have taken a look at how Steiner points operate from a spatial puzzle perspective, lets revisit our spanning tree molecule originally introduced in Figure 17. If we applied Steiner points to link nodes in close proximity, then we would have something similar to what is seen in Figure 25. Figure 25 These Steiner nodes could take many forms. They could be teleporters, actual level geometry, or even height elements that allow for faster path traversal. Figure 25 shows how many Steiner points we could possibly have in this spatial design. According to Koster, too many Steiner points are bad for human players, because you have provided so much opportunity; there really isn't much scope to exercise what I like to call "skillful strategy." Basically, there is no pleasure to be derived from creating shortcuts in this environment because there are so many of them. Figure 26 If we begin to use level geometry to reduce the amount of possible Steiner points, we are beginning to ask much more of the player. By giving them fewer options (Figure 26), we are asking the player to exercise better strategy than the other players on the map. The upside to this is that players who do well in this environment will take much more satisfaction from its successful completion, as they perceive the lack of options to be indicative of a more complex problem. To demonstrate how a reduction in Steiner points relates to increased difficulty, we need look no further than the Steiner tree problem that we see in the lower, east quadrant of the Fallout 3 overworld (see Figure 27.) Figure 27 Spatial navigation problems in the early parts of Fallout 3 are negotiated via simple spanning trees where you have many possible Steiner points. This is most noticeable in the areas to the south of main Vault as this is the first (and easiest) part of the map that the player is expected to explore. As difficulty increases, though, these Steiner points are vastly reduced; this can be seen in the subway system of DC, which the player encounters later in the main quest of Fallout 3. A Practical Implementation So far we have examined the basic principles of graphing theory and applied this to the analysis of a number of commercial examples, but how does graphing theory stack up as a tool to concept game spaces? The following is an example of a practical implementation of the theory of molecule design created by Nassib Azar. In this example, a molecule concept is tested, implemented, and refined in order to create a balanced, multiplayer space, which despite its simplicity, offers players with a significant amount of interesting strategic possibilities to explore. The core idea Nassib decided to explore was a map design which had three layers of experience, represented as three concentric circles. The game space is a deathmatch style map within the default game type of Unreal Development Kit. The outer layer comprises low intensity zones designed to "feed" players into the innermost section of the game space. For the purposes of this design, "intensity" is measured by the amount of players actively trying to kill each other within each zone. Figure 28 is one of the preproduction sketches of the map. This diagram explores how choke points, intersections, spawn points and weapon pickups could be used to increase the intensity of the play experience as the player nears the center of the map. Figure 28 After some initial paper prototypes and feedback, the core idea of three concentric play spaces of varying intensity eventually developed into a more concrete molecule which defines the space as a whole. Figure 29 is an iteration of the early concept. In this iteration, we still have the same set of concentric circles representing intensity of play; however, edges have been added to describe how the outer sections feed into the middle. To achieve this goal, Nassib applied the notion of Compression and Funneling, a simple tool which looks at how forcing the player around a game space using various game elements can create heightened emotional states. In Figure 29, each edge represented additional vectors of compression on the nodes they led to. In the case of this example, the nodes represented spaces for conflict; the more the edges leading into a node the higher the compression on that node (and as a result, the higher the intensity of game experience). In this application, node size was used to represent increased compression, and subsequently, intensity of play. Figure 29 Although the application of molecule design is meant to create a distinction between play experience and level geometry, Nassib chose to explore whether pure geometrical representations of space have inherent player experience value. The hexagonal attributes of Nassib's molecule prototypes were worthy of further investigation. The question was: Would the molecule translate to actual level geometry and still retain the original design intent? The prototype molecule used to define the overall game space went through a number of iterations in the form of grey box levels developed within UDK. It was clear through prototyping that the experiment had merit; the intensity of the player's experience increases as they work their way towards the center of the map. Nodes became generic play spaces (rooms) and edges became corridors that would feed into these spaces. Figure 30 is one of the more advanced iterations of the grey box. It shows the implementation of the original molecule into a playable space. During testing, it was found that for intensity of play to increase, the room sizes needed to increase in order to accommodate the increased play intensity. Room sizes are designed to create the most optimal zone sizes for the desired amount of play intensity. The original molecule design translated well in this regard. Play zones became progressively larger as they player moves towards the center of the map, yet the zones are also small enough to force the players into close proximity combat, hence increasing play intensity. Figure 30 In order to create a siphoning of players towards the center of the map, a molecule was designed to aid in the placement of various weapon pickups. There are two main molecules used to define token placement. Weapon pickups were embedded in a molecule that forced the player to move quickly towards the center of the map. Health pickups were embedded in a molecule that forced the player to explore the circular boundaries of each play zone. The differing nature of these two molecules not only adds to creating clearly defined and different movement tactics for offensive and defensive play, but also aids spreading play over the entirety of the map rather than the central most zones. Figure 31 Figure 31 breaks down the graphing further. In the close up of the medium node (upper left), a differentiation is made between two different edge types leading into it. Edges 1 and 2 come from the spawn point while 3 and 4 are fed from other medium nodes. This suggests a difference in danger level and is therefore represented by expressing the edges differently. Although the initial design hypothesis suggested that there would be some type of discernable difference between edges one and two AND three and four, it took several revisions of the grey box to observe this hypothesis the real world, seen in Figure 32. Figure 32 Early iterations of the grey box demonstrated a fundamental flaw in the design. Although play was becoming intensified as it reached the center of the map, a secondary mechanic was emerging; players became aware that it was possible to farm the outer ring of the map and rack up numerous spawn kills. As a result of testing, edges [corridors] 1 and 2 were raised to create one-way gates, allowing them to feed players into the map but not allowing players already within the map to access the spawn points. The elevated corridors were re-conceptualized in the physical space as maintenance shafts, as can be seen below in Figure 33. Figure 33 The placement of pickups also benefited from the molecule design approach and followed a similar symmetrical layout to the level geometry. Although the use of symmetrical molecules creates an easy workflow for designing the map, too much symmetry is often boring and even confusing for players. To address this issue, asymmetry was used to create navigation landmarks for the players as well rooms that highlighted different types of weapons and game mechanics. Differences in each room's layout served two purposes: to aid with player navigation and to create "perceived" advantages to each room. Perceived unfairness suggests no matter how fair or balanced a system is, players will be drawn to elements of the game that they believe are broken, even if they are not. In essence, each room in the second ring contained a different type of spatial molecule. The molecules differed by varying choke points and cover elements. The result of this can be seen in the comparison between Figure 34 and Figure 35; both are rooms in the second ring and both offer different types of play experience within them. Figure 34 After further iteration and testing, it was found that players were entering the primary room more than the second ring / medium rooms, but not at the expected proportion. The intensity of the play experience needed to be very high in the center room and there simply was not enough player traffic to achieve the desired experience. Of course, this could have been addressed with revising the space to make it smaller, however as much of the level art had already gone into production, it became necessary to look at alternative option. To amplify this experience, a second ring of player spawn points where created on the mezzanine floor of the secondary ring. The walking distance to the center room from the upper spawns was shorter than the ground floor and therefore encouraged far more traffic to the central room and as such created the desired effect. Figure 35 The two stacked spawns in Figure 36 did not have the same spawn-to-engagement times to the mid rooms. In other words, the edges above were not equal to those below when they should have been. By changing the position of the spawns in line with the revised molecule design, time to engagement was negligible when compared with the existing spawn points. Figure 36 Symmetrical molecules create fair distribution of stairs and elevators in the map; however, the actual design of each of these three elevators is varied intentionally (Figure 37). The rationale for this approach was to highlight the psychology of perceived unfairness. Via testing, it was shown that most players thought that the stairs near their spawn point gave them the advantage, and that this advantage was not used against them. Asymmetry was also used in the design of stairs themselves, again this served two functions: to assist with navigation and vary the play experience in the medium rooms. Figure 37 Another strategy that was used for balancing was not in the graphing theory itself, but highlights how graphing theory can help read player behavior. A Kismet script was created where every three minutes the game would compare the number of players that have passed through each of the six medium rooms and determine which one had the least traffic. The room with the least activity would then spawn a trigger. When pressed by a player, this trigger would vent every other player into space, killing them and scoring multiple kills for the instigator. (Figure 38 is a view from above the map, and the last thing a player would see before dying.) This encourages "heat" where there is least, therefore creating a dynamic balancing system through mechanics rather than the static graphing. When presented with this scenario, players are given a choice to exercise Steiner point solutions to resolve the spatial problem -- what is the shortest route to the target. Figure 38 Once the script had identified the room with the least traffic, all players in the map receive both an auditory and a console announcement letting them know which medium room the trigger is available in. Depending on the player's current location, they are presented with two main choices. They can use the risky, but shortest path through the center OR they can navigate the longer, but safer path through the medium rooms, avoiding the central conflict area. By doing so, we have created two different strategies for players; they can use the middle room as a Steiner node or use the outer rooms as a spanning tree solution (Figure 39). These strategic options play to a player's sense of accomplishment. The player feels a sense of pride, as they feel they are outwitting the rest by taking a shortcut to the proper room. Level assets used to populate the various rooms also served to reduce the total amount of possible Steiner points, creating higher intrinsic value for finding one of the limited solutions. Figure 39 The final published map went through eight major revisions, resulting in updates to either the grey box or the molecules themselves to achieve the final product. Underpinning each revision was a revised molecule concept that would then be converted into a grey box. As such, each revision had clear objectives and goals and the final product benefited greatly from this, as time was extremely limited. Conclusion People like Dan Cook and Chris Crawford look at how people's motivation to play games stems from our need to learn and prove these new gained skills. Raph Koster takes this notion further by being even more specific; people are pattern-finding machines and we take pleasure from games when we identify patterns and pre-empt them. It therefore stands to reason that using the pattern-based approach of molecule design to define play spaces immediately plays to this desire. There is one main consideration to keep in mind; the player doesn't perceive the game as a planar map; they sense it from their own camera frustum. As such, the scale and "identifiability" of the molecules you want to implement is very much limited by how much of the game world the player can perceive at any one point in the game. Too often designers create labyrinth type maps, which -- although being easily understand from a planar perspective -- are absolutely impossible to traverse when viewed through the limited perspective of the player. As such, molecules and the patterns that they create need not necessarily be complex in order for them to be "fun" for the player. Instead, well designed game spaces tend to have a number of nested molecules, rather than a molecule that defines the space as a whole. The practical example created by Nassib Azar is relatively simple from a graphing perspective, however the amount of molecule permutations created by the dynamic game elements create a diverse, yet manageable set of strategies for the players to explore. It is important to point out the use of graphing theory to conceptualize and analyze game spaces is not a new idea, but rather one that has been discussed in various forms by different authors. The original inspiration for this research came from Raph Koster and his Games are Math presentation, and I would recommend Koster's work to anyone interested in rational approaches to design. Joris Dormans also has a few informative articles that deal with how graphing theory can be a powerful tool for level designers. Dormans' Adventures in Level Design and Level Design as Model Transformation [Links N/A] are excellent and display the malleability of this toolset. *Note: This article is posted on Next Level Design with permission from the author\ Follow Luke Website: Follow Nassib Website: Twitter:
  3. People ask me sometimes where my ideas come from. Well, that’s not exactly true, nobody asks me that, but all kinds of famous people say people ask them that so I figured I’d jump on the bandwagon. But if they DID ask me, this is what I’d say (at least as far as level design). I design a level one “setup” at a time, then I link all the setups together to form a level. When I’m thinking of a specific setup, here is the basic process I go through: WARNING: GET READY FOR A TON OF BULLETED LISTS AND SENTENCE FRAGMENTS!!! Bullets R Boring! Gimmeh some pictoorz! Intensity Curve How many setups are in the level? On a scale of 1 to 10, rate each setup in terms of how intense (difficulty + energy) it should be. These numbers should go up over the course of the level, but we should have some noise in this regard (see image below). "Interest Curve" As defined by Jesse Schell in The Art of Game Design: A book of lenses Difficulty / Intensity Where is this setup located on the “intensity” curve of the level? Does the intensity curve want a combat setup or a non-combat setup here? If we want the intensity to die down a bit, non-combat setups help with that. If it’s a combat setup, based on the intensity curve, determine the number of enemies and the combination of enemies in the setup. Never repeat a setup. Always introduce an enemy before you use multiples of that enemy or use the enemy in combination with other enemies. (Enemy A, Then Enemy B, then two A’s, then an A with a B, then two Bs, then two As and two Bs, etc). Choose the enemies based on “archetypes” (see below). Terrain Features Gaps: Horizontal separators. Need to determine: Width The path around or over the gap The fiction or type of the gap (cover, a river, a pit, etc…) Ledges: Vertical separators. Need to determine: Height (usually in two increments: Short and Tall) The path to the top of the ledge The fiction or type of the ledge (a car, a balcony, a platform…etc) Gaps and ledges Area Shape Determine the size (Should it feel tight, normal, or vast) Make sure enemy entrance or spawn points are visible from the player’s entrance point Reveal VS Recon (Is the player surprising the enemies or are the enemies surprising the player. This should vary based on the intensity curve) Make sure the area contains or has a view of some kind of focal point. The action should revolve around or serve to frame this visual focus. Tight Space Enemy Archetypes Near: Attacks close-up Far: Attacks from far away Heavy: Can be near or far, but should be player’s top priority if all else is equal Popcorn: Can be near of far. Not dangerous unless in groups. Should make the player feel strong. Near / Far / Swarmer / Heavy Enemy Idle Behavior If the player is surprising the enemies, what are they doing before he triggers them? (Patrolling, idling, juggling, etc…) Enemy Intro Behavior How is the enemy introduced? Spawn-in: The enemy appears (Teleport, jump in, etc) Run-in: The enemy comes in from off-screen (run ,fly, etc) None, the enemy is already there when the setup starts These should be varied based on the intensity curve. Enemy Trigger Zones Where does the player have to be for the enemies to activate and begin attacking? Where does the player have to be for the enemies to stop following him once they’re activated? Where does the player have to be for the enemies to deactivate? Enemy Location / Placement Must be visible to the player from the entrance to the area Do we want enemies to clump or be spaced out? Are the enemies close to or distant from the entrance How close or far do we want them from terrain features? (Over a gap, up on a ledge, behind cover, etc…) Place important items E.g. Explody barrels, health, etc Usually place close to a wall or suggestively (an explody barrel right next to a group of guys) Coin placement! Place gravy items Rewards: (Crates, coins, etc) Pure gravy: E.g. Breakable scenery Visual gravy: Non-breakable scenery, usually to provide movement or points of interest. (Blinky lights, scrolling water, plants, etc…) 'What are you trying to say? That I can stop bullets?' Source: *Note: This article has been posted in full with permission from the author Follow Mike Website: Website: Twitter: Follow Next Level Design Join the Forum: Follow us on Twitter: Discuss on Discord:
  4. Lighting: The theory behind lighting out your levels. How to create an interesting setup and what to watch out for. IntroductionLighting is one of the most important and influential elements in environments. It has the power to make or break the visuals, theme and atmosphere.Lighting is often forgotten or underestimated. Designers often add it quickly and without much love. While in the past that was partially excusable by the weak hardware and game engines, these excuses just won't hold up anymore. Lighting is just as important as geometry. Without lighting there is no environment but just a group of 3 dimensional objects. Lighting has the capacity to bring life to a group of objects and take them to the next level of quality. Its purpose goes further than just giving the players the ability to see where they are going.It creates atmosphere. It makes places look scary/cozy or warm/cold. It augments the three dimensional feel of objects and it creates composition and balance to lead the player's eyes around. Yet considering all of that there is a very large group of games and levels out there which use nothing more than white ambient lighting everywhere.The SourceThe most basic rule of lighting is that it always needs a lightsource. Even more important, and this is the second rule; the light should appear to be cast by a source. It is impossible to have lighting in an area with no source, like in this bad example. Info P083: UT2004 level DM Rankin – Personal work – Owned by Epic Games – Modified version to fit the example While there is plenty of lighting in this corridor it's impossible to tell where the light is coming from. This completely breaks the illusion and looks fake.Also to be avoided is lighting that is out of balance with the size of the source. For example, a small light source that somehow manages to illuminate an entire room or corridor, like in this bad example. Info P084: UT level CTF Ortican – Personal work – Owned by myself and textures by Epic Games – Modified version to fit the example Keep things in proportion!Light sources can be anything: small or large lamps hanging on walls or from ceilings, the moon or the sun, crystals, lasers and other type of high tech beams, fire, mirrors, magical effects, water surfaces that bounce back light, lava or radioactive slime and so on. Everything is possible as long as there is a noticeable source.The same goes for the brightness of the source itself. If the lighting is very bright the source itself should not be dim. It should be just as bright and, if possible, have effects like a glow to enhance the brightness. Info P085: UT level DM Sion – Personal work – Owned by myself – Modified version to fit the example The left example is bad because the lamp appears to be disabled even while the environment does seem to receive lighting of it. The brightness of the light source and the brightness of the lighting in an area must be balanced and appear equal.Related to this is the next important aspect. Show the player where exactly the light is coming from. The area near a source should look the brightest. A logical thought. Info P086: UT level CTF Raid – Personal work – Owned by myself – Modified version to fit the example The first example is bad, the second one is good. The first one is bad because the entire area has an equal brightness which is strange. It doesn't feel as if the lighting is really coming from the lamp. The lighting should be considerably brighter near the source than ten meters further away in a corner. It should fade out as it travels further and further away from the source. It should show variation and that's not only more realistic but it also helps the lighting composition. Show a direct influence from one element on the other!ColorsThe most complex rule of lighting is that colored lighting is a must and absolute requirement in almost every situation. Colors can make or break a composition; they shape the atmosphere and emotions associated with an area and they simply make environments more interesting and lively to look at.Most light sources in the world cast lighting that, in one way or another, have color. Therefore it is not very realistic to place white lighting in the environment. For example, a lamp might cast yellow light because it is surrounded by yellow glass. Or perhaps it is an old lamp and the glass is beginning to change color due to the wet environment it is in. Or perhaps the light is shining on a yellow wall thus causing the light rays to bounce off and carry the yellow color to another surface which results in the seemingly yellow lighting.That bouncing is the radiosity effect and as up to now there still aren’t any games which can offer correct and complex radiosity lighting.Therefore, until there is such technology available, one must color the lights oneself instead of relying on how the atmosphere or materials might enhance the lighting. They won't because of the limited technology. If color isn't added, the result will be very bland and fake.Another aspect of lighting is the light temperature. There is a theory that says light is energy and the stronger the light the more energy it has and thus the warmer it is. The temperature influences the strength. Info P091a: lighting temperatures – Owned by myself 1600K is sunset and sunrise and 1800K is a candle. 2800K is a regular light, 5000K is midday sun and so on. Thus the chance that the light in the game environment would cast pure white lighting is rather small.Also notice that red is actually colder than blue. Arc welding or lightning are blue because they are much hotter and stronger compared to a pretty weak, regular, orange fire.A warm blue and a cold red contradict what you will read in a few pages about the warmth of a color. Remember that blue is only warmer than red in a scientific perspective. Emotionally, on the other hand, red probably feels warmer than blue. Common color associations are at the base of that feeling. When something is hot it will glow red while cold things like water and ice are blue. They influence our perspective toward colors. These are very powerful clichés.Another reason to use colors is the composition. In fact one color is not enough most of the time; at least two colors are needed or else creating contrast will be impossible. If only one lighting color is used, that very important color contrast is lost and the result would again be very bland. Info P091: UT level DM Sion – Personal work – Owned by myself – Modified version to fit the example Change is also necessary in order to form a composition and one color can not offer the necessary changes. The colors used need to be balanced. They need to strike the right balance between providing enough contrast yet still complement each other. Harmony is the word to remember well when dealing with lighting.Before being able to work with lighting colors one must understand how colors work. There is a huge difference between the regular colors used to create textures and the colors used to light an area with. Lighting is made of RGB, which stands for Red, Green and Blue. CRT monitors and TV's use this system as well.On the other hand paintings, pencils, prints and so on are CMY. They operate on three totally different primary base colors: Cyan, Magenta and Yellow. Or, in very simplified terms, blue, red, and yellow; the primary colors - which are often learned about when one is very young.The real difference between the two systems lies in how they create colors; or how they mix. CMY colors will end up as a brown black mess when mixed together. Think about what happened to all the colors when someone mixed all the paint together back in grade school.RGB on the other hand will end up as white when mixed. Shine multiple colored lights at one spot and they will end up creating a white spot.The important difference for us is that certain color combinations which work great in a painting will never work out in lighting! And the other way around. It is impossible to use a color combination that works in CMY for lighting because of two reasons.First off, any color viewed is a mix of the three primary colors. RGB mixes differently so the colors it creates simply will look different than those created by CMY. This is especially a problem when one color accidentally mixes with another in spots, something that is bound to happen when working with lighting. Mixing blue and red in CMY might look nice in paint but when red and blue are used in lighting they will create purple spots. Certain variations and mixes of colors are not the same in both types.Secondly, lighting RGB (notice the word lighting in front of it as what's about to be explained is only true for lighting) simply doesn't have all the colors CMY has. Converting color combinations is therefore not always possible. RGB does not have dark yellow, dark red and so on. It can't create dark colors because lighting cannot be dark - it is always light. It can however be more or less saturated or intense but not dark. Black light doesn't exist. And thus neither does gray or brown light exist.One could say that lighting uses simpler colors and has more limitations. There are fewer colors and less subtle changes to use because of the lack of dark colors. Lighting is constrained to a relatively small set of colors that can be used.What makes this even more difficult is that half of those available colors almost never work out well in most themes and subtle changes in hue or saturation are barely noticeable. Colors like purple or pink are almost impossible to use in most themes and styles because they simply do not fit in nor look natural. Using them will most likely result in some weird and unrealistic disco style rather than anything else. The palette of colors to use is very small and mainly consists of yellow, orange, blue, cyan, red and a tiny bit of green.Never use painter logic and rely on mixing brighter lights with darker lights to create changes in your environment. Dark colors do not exist! One can only see a difference when a light's color or saturation radically changes so subtle changes won't be noticeable. Here's why: Light is always a gradient. It always creates a lighter area and a darker area. Lighting simply starts somewhere and then fades out as it travels further away from its source. If one attempts to create contrast by using darker and brighter lights of the same color then the result wouldn't show a contrast at all but would look weird because some lights would appear too weak to be possible.Now that the theory of color has been explained, it is time to apply this knowledge to light application in a level. The idea behind colors is to allow them to add to the theme and atmosphere and to let them create a composition to aid the eyes and to keep things interesting.Colors continued: composition and choicesColors offer various types of contrasts and feelings. It is essential to understand them and use them correctly in order to create interesting and fitting lighting for the level.One should almost always use more than one light color in the level. As mentioned before, the key to create an interesting look and composition is to create well balanced contrasts. Too little or too much contrast is bad. Info P092: UT level DM Sion – Personal work – Owned by myself – Modified version to fit the example Neither looks good. The first picture is very repetitive and thus boring because everything has the same lighting color. The second picture has so many different lighting colors that there's no harmony and it looks completely random. This is undesirable.Avoid weak compositions or very harsh ones. When transformed into the flow charts, previously seen in the composition chapter, the above two pictures show clear problems. Info P093a and P093b: Scanlines The line either has very little change or the change is so hard and sudden that the eyes hit several steep walls when they follow the line.The line should show changes that are quite noticeable yet flow enough to not hurt the eyes. Info P094: Scanline It is for this reason that the right combinations and placement of the lighting colors are needed. I personally always use two main light colors such as blue and yellow and then a third color, like orange, to give extra contrast and difference to a few special elements.The third color is to prevent the two main colors from becoming repetitive. Too much of the same combination can also become boring. The third color's purpose is to occasionally break up that combination.I refrain from using four colors because too many colors can make things look random. It should never look like a mess; unity is the goal.Composition-wise, lighting colors should follow the same rules as highlights. Their composition must be evenly spread out so there are no large spots of the same color which could unbalance the visuals in that area! If the entire right side of a room only has blue lights and the left side has blue and yellow lights it might appear unbalanced. This also depends on the composition of other elements such as the architecture and any moving geometry though.Now one may wonder what colors to use and combine. Combining colors in lighting is about more than just finding a random combination that looks cool. There are systems and arguments that help create the right combination. The lighting colors should not only enhance the visuals and the composition but they should also enhance the theme and atmosphere. The choice of what colors to use depends, for a large part, on the theme and desired atmosphere. A scary theme requires cold colors for example.There are different types of color combinations and each one of them offers another type of contrast.First of all there are cold and warm colors. Some colors feel cold, such as blue, while others feel warm, like orange. Cold colors are blue, green and purple. Warm colors are yellow, red and orange. It is logical that combining a warm and a cold color can give nice results.Another type is the strong and easy color combination. Some colors are very aggressive and powerful while others are very easy and relaxed. Strong colors grab a lot of attention even if they are used in small amounts. Red is the best example of this. It is such a powerful color that even a small spot in an environment can be dominating. Info P095: TCOS Carnyx – Personal work – Owned by Spellborn NV – Modified version to fit the example In this picture the one thing that stands out the most is the red light. Red is incredibly aggressive and thus should be used with caution since it can make the player forget everything else in the scene. That might not be the desired effect.Other aggressive colors are orange and then yellow. Easy colors are the colors that invoke comfort and calm. They rest the eyes. Easy colors are blue, green, and purple.The last type of color combination is the light and dark one. Is the color closer to white or closer to black? The simplest way of checking if a color is light or dark is to think what would happen if it was converted to grayscale. Think of what a copy machine would do to it. Red is a dark color. It becomes almost black when converted to grayscale. The same is true for blue and purple. On the other hand green, and especially yellow, are bright colors.Choosing the right color is not just a random choice. The better the choice the better the contrast will be and therefore the better it will look. Two cold colors should not be chosen as the main light colors, for example. One is better off combining different types of colors together like a warm orange with a cold blue.The best combination of colors to use in lighting is yellow with blue and all the variations on it (for example orange-blue and yellow-turquoise).Yellow is a bright, aggressive, and warm color while blue is a dark, easy, and cold color. It is the only combination that manages to use the opposites of all three types, which is also the reason why it is used in so many games. The yellow also is subtle enough to not draw all the attention to itself like red would. And next to all that it is also the most natural combination. More on that later.To complicate things more, there is one element which can make the effects of each of these different types stronger of weaker and that is saturation. White is a special color that feels neither cold nor warm, aggressive or easy. Apart from being a bright color, it is very neutral so lowering the saturation of a color can neutralize the effects a little and that can be useful. In order to achieve a balanced look it's necessary to find the right saturation for the colors. If all the colors are one hundred percent saturated the result would probably be a very harsh look with very strong colors. Info P096: UT level DM Sion – Personal work – Owned by myself and textures by Epic Games – Modified version to fit the example While creating contrast, unity should not be forgotten. In the example above the contrast is way too harsh resulting in an ugly, unbalanced, and unrealistic situation. It is the balance between the two that forms the key to success. I usually pick colors that are only fifty percent saturated but whatever works for the particular situation is good.Slightly desaturating your main colors is, in most cases, the way to go although there are always exceptions. For example, colors like red will turn pink when desaturated. There are also a couple of light sources that always need very saturated light; fire for example.The amount of saturation something has can greatly alter its look or feel. A very white blue feels colder than a very saturated blue. This is important when one is after a cold feel.And that brings us to another very important point: theme. As mentioned before colors are not randomly chosen. 'Because it looks nice' should never be the sole argument about why color X is being used. The color combination should not only fit together but it should also enhance the theme and atmosphere. For example, if the theme is an ice environment, then lots of warm colors, like orange, shouldn't be used. Info P097: Example – Personal work – Owned by Spellborn NV The first example is bad, the second one is good as it feels colder. A cold environment needs cold colors; blue for example.People associate colors with feelings. The whiter the color is the cleaner or colder the area will appear while darkness is experienced as scary or depressing. When I design a new level I always ask myself the question 'What color do people associate with the theme I have in mind?' If I design a lava environment it's very clear I will need a lot of red and orange lighting.After I have my first main color I always try to find the second main color. The second main color has to create a contrast yet look nice in combination with the first color. When my theme involves lots of water or a sea my first main color will be blue and my second color yellow. A dawn environment asks for yellow or perhaps even a deep orange as the first main color and blue as the second main color. Humid environmentsfeel better with some green and so on.As mentioned in other chapters it is about clichés. People need to quickly recognize something and they can do that through clichés.Sunlight is perhaps the best example of how radiosity and contrasting colors work and how the atmosphere affects the color. Unless it is noon, direct sunlight is always slightly colored. Think of what color the sun has in the evening or at dawn. It will appear as orange or yellow most of the times. Indirect sunlight has a color as well. It is usually a blue/slightly purple color. Info P098: Examples – Personal work – Owned by myself In these evening beach photos the color of the sun and ambient lighting is readily apparent. The direct sunlight is orange while the ambient light is blue. White lighting is, in almost all situations, unrealistic; just as coloring an entire outdoor area with the same color is. In most situations there should always be two colors around. One for the direct sunlight, which is likely a type of yellow, and one for the indirect sunlight, which is usually a type of blue. Not only is this realistic but it will also look much better.Texturing and lightingTexturing can make or break your lighting. Textures are the base for the lighting. The texturing of the world carries a large responsibility. While I already explained this theory in the texture chapter I would like to give a few common mistakes extra focus.If a texture is too dark it cannot be lit well. The same goes for overly bright or white textures. They will look very bright when lit. Info P099: Examples – Personal work – Owned by myself A solution could be to up or downscale the intensity of the lights but that is not the best way to go. In the end the fault lies in the texturing and not in the lighting so it is the texturing that has to be fixed. Fix the cause, not the result.Changing the light intensity will also cause trouble if the level uses a combination of dark and bright textures (a snow level with dark buildings for example). Downscaling the light intensity would make the darker textures appear even darker and if one were to upscale it the bright textures would look way too bright. Therefore the textures used in an environment should be balanced and have roughly the same level of brightness!The same is true for colors in textures. The colors used in textures can influence the look and feel of the lighting and they will. It is essential to foresee which lighting colors to use while texturing the level. If the textures in an area are, for example, very orange and yellow it might end up weird when they are later lit with blue lighting. Info P100: Examples – Personal work – Owned by myself If the design is to light the environment with many blue lights for whatever reason, then, during texturing, it should be ensured that the textures are desaturated enough or have roughly the same color as most of the lighting.The point is that the texture choice can heavily influence the lighting. Textures and materials are the base for lighting, and if the texturing isn't in harmony with the lighting, then one of the two is going to suffer. All elements in a world are connected and influence each other.Article Source:*This article is posted in its entirety with permission from the authorFollow Sjoerd De JongWebsite:
  5. In part one of this short series on lighting from Steve Theodore, we learned about colored lighting and how to use it to impact your audience. As part of that article, Star Wars was used as a bit of a case study. This week we're not talking about Star Wars, but we are going to talk about the dark side...of lighting. Today we talk about contrast. Let's start off with an observation on the relationship between color and contrast: Now we know that contrast can ruin the mood we set out to create through our use of colored light. Can it have the opposite impact? Can it enhance the mood? The answer to this is an emphatic 'YES'! Here are Steve's thoughts on how contrast can complement color in creating the desired mood: These ratios don't need to be (and in most cases shouldn't be) strictly followed, but they can be good guidelines to start with. Experiment to see how adjusting this ratio can impact the feelings that are evoked. Finally, we get to the problem of outdoor lighting, which Steve has quite a lot to say about. So how can we work within this limited range of shades, and still create outdoor settings that look realistic? The answer is...drum roll...contrast. Next, we get to the issue of how textures are impacted by lighting: Though this recap should provide a fair sense of what the article is about, we've skipped over a decent amount of the information. I recommend reading the original article, which can be found here. Source: