Jaquaying the Quake Maps - Analysis of Quake 1 and 2 Maps (PART II)
(for those of you just joining us, see my Part I on Quake I)
QUAKE 2 ANALYSIS
Quake 2 Preface
Before going on with the analysis, let's speak a few words. Quake 2 is generally considered an inferior FPS to Quake 1 in single player for multiple reasons. Some even consider its multiplayer weaker too. That being said, I'm taking a look only at the level design. My initial feeling will be that levels will be more complex because the engine offers more and they were more mature about it. Lastly, most of the levels are much shorter (I'm guessing because of processing/rendering concerns), so it is more difficult sometimes to grade them hence I was more generous.
There are a lot of "hidden" (not hidden that much but still...) alternate paths, so keep in mind my Secret category also cover those. I'm saying this because the secrets in Quake 2 are much smaller in scope so people might be asking themselves why some maps have the Secret point if that is so.
Also, I'd just like to point out 26 level design tips by Jaquay from an older interview. Not all of them are relevant to general dungeon design outside of video games, but it's still worth a read.
Let me first say that I wish Romero would have done maps for Quake 2 as his map in Quake 1 were solid and I know he would have made great use of the engine.
Antkow and James did the worst level of the bunch. Their level are unmemorable, generally boring, and sometimes broken. I've got nothing really to add or say except play them yourselves to get your own opinion. But even outside of opinions, as you can see their level integrate very few interesting features.
Willits again provided a solid stream of works. I dare say that some of his work in here are more wide across the spectrum: some are better than his best in Quake 1, but some are also worst than his worst in Quake 1 (although the Wind Tunnel is difficult to beat). Yet my favorable comments regarding Quake 1 also applies here: he made great use of the new capability of the 3D environment and the engine and it's a great result.
McGee is the biggest surprise as I've said in my comments and his level are among the best of the whole bunch. Top tier with Jaquay. I can't say much more since he only did a specific portion of the game levels.
You can see the difference in Jaquay level design, it's really interesting to see it shine so much: there are more traps, more mazes, more more application of the different level design technique (branching, loops, hub to come back to, etc.) than the other designers. There are also more attention to visual details and the level are richer for that. I'll be honest I really thought that the level would be good, but that the difference wouldn't be "that" big (especially after McGee): I was pleasantly surprised. Although to be fair, I don't necessarily consider it world apart from the others: Romero level in Quake 1, McGee level in Quake 2 and the overall quality of Willits are very much in the same league (although visually less intricate, but like I said, I can't say for sure if it's just Jaquay or if its the 3D texture maturity of the endgame having been developped). The last three level of Jaquay really felt like an interconnected whole, a "dungeon" so to speak. It is almost more akin to Doom than it is to Quake: normal Quake levels uses 3D to provide a more dynamic and fast pace action. Here Jaquay uses the 3D space to create more complex and intricate environment that feels more like dungeoncrawling than pure unfiltered action. Although none of them were 15, you can see that it's mostly due to my personal appreciation and some issues with the pacing. But the maps in themselves, emptied of everything, are an absolute beauty and are by far the best in the series so far.
[EDIT: I added the following block later. It came to me that this should have been there initially as it brings everything more together with examples.}
DETAILED ANALYSIS
I will now discuss in detail my two favorite maps, once for each game: e2m1 (The Installation) for Quake 1 and e2m1 (Ammo Depot) for Quake 2.
Quake 1 - e2m1
e2m1 map blueprint. Rights to the owner and graciously found on the quakewiki from http://www.benryves.com/
Quake 2 - Ammo Depot
I couldn't find any blueprint or map drawing, sorry! Here is my own general reconstruction of the map in a pointcrawl format. I am sorry for the low (paint) quality. Just to be clear, most of the big rooms with an adjacent elevated/underground room means they are all stacked on each other in one giant room with multi-level. You could probably just consider it one giant room, but since they sometimes serve different purpose and are on different height I separated them.
[EDIT: End of the added block]
Outer Hangar map
QUAKE 2 ANALYSIS
Quake 2 Preface
Before going on with the analysis, let's speak a few words. Quake 2 is generally considered an inferior FPS to Quake 1 in single player for multiple reasons. Some even consider its multiplayer weaker too. That being said, I'm taking a look only at the level design. My initial feeling will be that levels will be more complex because the engine offers more and they were more mature about it. Lastly, most of the levels are much shorter (I'm guessing because of processing/rendering concerns), so it is more difficult sometimes to grade them hence I was more generous.
There are a lot of "hidden" (not hidden that much but still...) alternate paths, so keep in mind my Secret category also cover those. I'm saying this because the secrets in Quake 2 are much smaller in scope so people might be asking themselves why some maps have the Secret point if that is so.
Also, I'd just like to point out 26 level design tips by Jaquay from an older interview. Not all of them are relevant to general dungeon design outside of video games, but it's still worth a read.
- Know what you want to do with a level before you start. Don't expect a map that you start as a single-player map to be easily changed into a multiplayer map. The reverse holds true for trying to make a Deathmatch map into a single-player challenge.
- Sketch out a diagram of the map to use as an initial guide.
- Don't start with grandiose projects. Try making something fun with a few rooms.
- If possible, build your level with a "gimmick" in mind--some tricky gamism bit that players will remember. Popular gimmicks that have been used in the past include wind tunnels, numerous portals, lava maps, trap maps, water-filled maps, maps with large, slow-moving hazards, and low-gravity maps.
- Try to be fresh and original with every new design. Do something that you haven't seen done before.
- Test gimmicks of gameplay, tricks, and traps in test levels before building them into your game level.
- Do architecture and texture studies ahead of time to establish an architectural style. Stick to that style.
- Block out your level with large pieces of geometry. Think of the architecture you'll use, but concentrate more on how gameplay will flow through the level. At this stage, I try to keep my map grid at the largest possible setting (in Quake II or Quake III, that's the "64" grid). Avoid fussy details at this point and go for massiveness. At this stage of development, try to keep your frame-rate speeds well below the amount allowed by the game (for Quake II, we aimed to be below a maximum count of 500 triangles of architecture in any view). A good rule might be to try for no more than a third of your total possible polygon count in the worst views in and near your larger rooms.
- Once the flow is established, you can start adding architectural detail and refining hall and room shapes.
- Build in a modular manner. Make prefabricated pieces that be can fit together easily to make your level. Build tricky pieces of detailed architecture (such as door frames, complicated cornices, or furniture) once and set them outside the boundaries of your map. Clone them as needed for placement in the map.
- When designing architectural elements, study the real world. Try to duplicate the look and feel of impressive works, but with less complicated geometry. Set yourself challenges in this regard.
- Strike a balance between the use of real geometry and textures that imply three-dimensional depth when building architectural details. Textures that appear to be 3D should be used with caution. When viewed from a distance, they can fool the eye into believing that the architectural geometry is significantly more complex than it actually is. But the same texture viewed up close and at eye level completely destroys the illusion of depth.
- Compile the map often. Don't wait until everything is placed to see what things look like (or if you have leaks in the map hull).
- Complete your map geometry before adding monsters and items.
- When building single-player game maps, don't put every game feature in the level. Having every monster possible in the game in a single game level is a glaring sign of amateur work. Generally speaking, the only place you're going to see all the monsters at once is in the AI programmer's test level.
- The same goes for tricks, traps, items, weapons, and power-ups. Unless your map is as massive as the 64-player DM maps created for Quake II, restrict the number of different items you put in the map. Use a few things cleverly, rather than many poorly.
- Small maps can be relatively similar throughout. Large maps should have distinctive, memorable locations that the player can use to orient himself in the map. "City64," a large DM map for Quake II, featured a huge canyon area, a massive alien temple, underwater caverns, a vast deep tank with water in the bottom, and numerous stretches of twisty corridors. The corridors were often similar, but they ended in distinctive large play areas.
- For DM maps, give the players frequent opportunities to avoid pursuit and dodge for cover. Long hallways with no exits are bad. Avoid forcing players to make long trips to dead-end rooms--even to get good power-ups.
- Place lights to achieve drama. If you have a choice between under-lighting an area and over-lighting it, err on the side of darkness. Just don't go overboard. Dark levels may look nifty, but stumbling around in the dark while playing gets old fast.
- Light as you go--even if you're only placing temporary lights.
- Don't forget the audio elements of a map. Sounds can provide important game clues.
- If possible, allow multiple solutions for puzzles. You can still reserve the greatest rewards for players who solve them in what the designer has decided is the "best way."
- Give the player a variety of game experiences and challenges in each map. All combat or all puzzles can get old quickly.
- Be kind to your players; don't over-challenge them unnecessarily. Well-placed environmental hazards add to the tension of game play, but falling into lava or slime every third step or being crushed to death by falling weights every time you turn around quickly becomes frustrating.
- Study maps you like and make an effort to duplicate or even improve situations and settings.
- Finish what you begin.
Jaquay also speaks of other interesting things, such as: choosing the unconventional solution, blending flavors, making it real (understood as verscimilitude), etc.
Overall
As you can see, secrets are much tamer in terms of what they open (less secret level, less alternate path). It's generally a room with ammo/weapon, and it's generally lame since you get those all the time (and newer weapons aren't new for a long time). For example, the Super Shotgun level is very nice, but it takes the same time to do the level to get the Super Shotgun than to just continue the campaign and get it. My guess is that this design decision was made by someone else than the level designers themselves since it seems to have been really widespread, just like in Quake 1. This is logical from the perspective of a 3D engine: it takes more time to create secret areas in 3D with all assets included than in Doom, for example.
Per Designer
Let me first say that I wish Romero would have done maps for Quake 2 as his map in Quake 1 were solid and I know he would have made great use of the engine.
Antkow and James did the worst level of the bunch. Their level are unmemorable, generally boring, and sometimes broken. I've got nothing really to add or say except play them yourselves to get your own opinion. But even outside of opinions, as you can see their level integrate very few interesting features.
Willits again provided a solid stream of works. I dare say that some of his work in here are more wide across the spectrum: some are better than his best in Quake 1, but some are also worst than his worst in Quake 1 (although the Wind Tunnel is difficult to beat). Yet my favorable comments regarding Quake 1 also applies here: he made great use of the new capability of the 3D environment and the engine and it's a great result.
McGee is the biggest surprise as I've said in my comments and his level are among the best of the whole bunch. Top tier with Jaquay. I can't say much more since he only did a specific portion of the game levels.
You can see the difference in Jaquay level design, it's really interesting to see it shine so much: there are more traps, more mazes, more more application of the different level design technique (branching, loops, hub to come back to, etc.) than the other designers. There are also more attention to visual details and the level are richer for that. I'll be honest I really thought that the level would be good, but that the difference wouldn't be "that" big (especially after McGee): I was pleasantly surprised. Although to be fair, I don't necessarily consider it world apart from the others: Romero level in Quake 1, McGee level in Quake 2 and the overall quality of Willits are very much in the same league (although visually less intricate, but like I said, I can't say for sure if it's just Jaquay or if its the 3D texture maturity of the endgame having been developped). The last three level of Jaquay really felt like an interconnected whole, a "dungeon" so to speak. It is almost more akin to Doom than it is to Quake: normal Quake levels uses 3D to provide a more dynamic and fast pace action. Here Jaquay uses the 3D space to create more complex and intricate environment that feels more like dungeoncrawling than pure unfiltered action. Although none of them were 15, you can see that it's mostly due to my personal appreciation and some issues with the pacing. But the maps in themselves, emptied of everything, are an absolute beauty and are by far the best in the series so far.
[EDIT: I added the following block later. It came to me that this should have been there initially as it brings everything more together with examples.}
DETAILED ANALYSIS
I will now discuss in detail my two favorite maps, once for each game: e2m1 (The Installation) for Quake 1 and e2m1 (Ammo Depot) for Quake 2.
Quake 1 - e2m1
e2m1 map blueprint. Rights to the owner and graciously found on the quakewiki from http://www.benryves.com/
- Generalities: The map is not complex, and could even be said to be "simple". But it is simple in the good sense. It is short, compact and offer a very dynamic approach (i.e. you can rapidly navigate it and take head on the challenge without any space/time loss). I feel the map represent the best of a "compact" approach to Quake mapping.
- Layout: As you can see, the layout is interesting in the sense that it's made into a square. In reality, the layout is more of a inverse U shape since there are no connections between the left/right section in the south. It's a very good level that's intuitive even with path closing behind you, loopings/branching, keycards, etc.
- Looping, branching and alternate paths: Right from the get go, you are offered two different paths to take: a corridor left that's enclosed, or an open room with a bridge above water on the right. What's even better is that said water actually brings you to yet another possible path for a secret. Then right after that, you get to a passage that separates again left and right. And that same room has a looping secrets passage with a teleporter back to the beginning. And that's like 30 seconds in. This gives you an idea with regards to branching and looping in this level. I suggest looking at a playthrough 100% on Youtube (or better yet, play it yourself) to get a better idea. It really feels like a full fledged great Doom 3D level with all the compact and complexity added. But yet it's always intuitive.
- Secrets and exploration: There are a lot of secrets. Some of them leads to teleportations, alternate rooms, and so on. It really encourage exploration, especially since most of them are not obtuse: going through the water is just a matter of exploring, not of hitting a random pixel with your gun.
- Use of 3D space: Water, elevators, above/below enemies, etc. This Quake 1 level really is interesting. It is kind of simple in its 3D, with generally only very clear elevation shifts and so on. But still, it's present and well done.
- Use of contrasts in time, space and visual: Like always, Romero does well the "corridor leads into an open room that leads into an enclosed space" loop. There are also more light variations. Also, it's interesting to consider the use of closing wall to create that sense of contrasts where the only way to go is forward, trapping you even more into the enclosed space (even if they actually reopen a bit later).
- Environment: Apart from the walls, use of 1-2 traps and water, there isn't much. Some enemies are hidden behind walls, as always, but it's fairly light on this, even by Quake 1 standard.
Quake 2 - Ammo Depot
I couldn't find any blueprint or map drawing, sorry! Here is my own general reconstruction of the map in a pointcrawl format. I am sorry for the low (paint) quality. Just to be clear, most of the big rooms with an adjacent elevated/underground room means they are all stacked on each other in one giant room with multi-level. You could probably just consider it one giant room, but since they sometimes serve different purpose and are on different height I separated them.
- Generalities: A nice level that makes great use of the 3D space (multiheight layered) and looping/branching that, even though the layout is actually "simple", it feels like it's complex with clever use of change of height, switches and environment interaction.
- Layout: The drawing I made didn't really give justice to the layout. In reality, there are a lot of overlapping bridges and passages, sometimes with up to four level of height in the same room. The layout is much more sprawling and distant, but because of the branching and looping, it feels all interconnected with very few backtracking. It also doesn't show justice to the alternance between elevators, slopes and passages to switch between rooms and heights. Finally, it also doesn't show well where you get shot from above by enemies, and then you finally reach that spot later on, creating a very nice forebodding sense "oh, I CAN get there!".
- Looping, branching and alternate paths: As yiou can see, there are some alternate paths, some rooms with closed door that require looking for solutions, some one way passages, some looping, etc. The only downside is that in such an FPS, looping isn't "that" useful because you have no real reason to come back. That being said, since we take a look at it from a dungeon design perspective, it's a very nice touch. Players going through this particular level would have been more than happy to find the "hidden" ladder that brings them back to the 4th room at the bottom.
- Secrets and exploration: There are quite a few secrets and hidden stuff, some of them leading to looping and such. Some require a leap of fatih (as per the one way passages), which is interesting. Nothing here is out of the ordinary with regards to that.
- Use of 3D space: Very well used: elevators, slopes, ammo crates, enemies with the higher or lower ground, nested rooms, etc. For level design, this serves multiple purpose. It gives a sense of dynamic exploration: you can travel three different axis. It also gives weight to (perceived) complexity: if you go up and down, it means you are now above other rooms you have to explore and vice versa. Finally, its used for encounter design with enemies below/above.
- Use of contrasts in time, space and visual: Lots of small passages open up to huge room and vice-versa. You have also contrats between the high and low: the lower you go, generally the more the space is confined (crates in big rooms, or small corridors). Whereas the higher you go, the more open it is (and even dangerously so since the high bridges/passages have no protection from falling, and enemies have kick-back attack!).
- Environment: Lava traps, enemy traps, traps against enemies, switches, elevators, etc. This level has a lot of them, even if they are very simple in design and scope. It's almost a "showcase" of sort. It's much more refined than the showcase we shaw in McGee level from Quake 1.
[EDIT: End of the added block]
CONCLUSION
We come to the conclusion of this small series... or did we? I've had much pleasure in doing this serie and I will be pursuing it in two other direction now:
- First, I want to assess a mod/wad of Quake 1 that's been said is an absolute marvel in terms of level design, "Arcane Dimension". I will try to play it when I get the time, take note and write an article on it if it's worth it (i.e. it if brings something different or interesting enough to comment). I will take time to also review my criterias. For example, I feel branching should be taken into consideration outside of the other categories. Encounter emplacement and the type of objective should be counted also (because I'm looking at Hexen with the switch hunting and I need to be able to take points off of that). Also, I should be clearer (and simpler) in the definition of some criteria.
- Secondly (although it will probably be published first), I will make a recap of everything I've learned about level design in this little serie and condense it into a digestible article that can be used by everyone. I will post different technique, example and application within the context of D&D/RPG maps.
It would be possible to expand this serie into an actual "game level design for D&D" that include classic like Dark Souls and such. I might do this... one day.
Let the Jaquaying continue!
Comments
Post a Comment