DMS Design: October 2014

Thursday, October 30, 2014

Vertical Slice CTF Level - "Los Malditos" Milestone 6

Derek holds a Bachelor's Degree in Game Design and has two and a half years of game development experience. To view his other work please visit www.dereksinex.com or his YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/JDKevlar

Vertical Slice CTF Level - "Los Malditos" Milestone 5

Sunday, October 19, 2014

Full Production Pipeline: Vertical Slice Level - "Kerrigan's Campaign: Base Infiltration"

Pre-Production 1

Pre-Production 2

Finalized Paper Map

Editor Time! Pt. 1

Editor Time! Pt. 2

Data Editor!

Final Video

Vertical Slice CTF Level - "Los Malditos" Milestone 3

Vertical Slice CTF Level - "Los Malditos" Milestone 2

Milestone Schedule: Vertical Slice CTF Level - "Los Malditos"

Los Malditos Production Milestone Schedule

Week 1 (9/16 – 9/25)

Place main static meshes symmetrically – 3 Hours

Stairs
Ramps
Cat-walks

Build level shell/skeleton – 5 Hours

Align room walls with static meshes
Base room floors/ceilings

Take Screenshots/Video for in-class presentation < 1 Hour

Week 2 (9/25 – 10/2)

Build complete geometry grey-boxed level – 5 Hours

Finish BSP brushes for all rooms/hallways
Add destroyed wall holes
Add place-holder lighting

Place items - 2 Hours

Player spawns
Health
Weapons
Bot Path Nodes

Preliminary texturing of level – 1 Hour

Texture all BSP geometry

Periodically test level for scale and basic gameplay < 1 Hour

Make changes as necessary based on feedback in and out of class

Take Screenshots/Video for in-class presentation < 1 Hour

Week 3 (10/2 – 10/9)

Complete scripting – 1 Hour

Death Pit
Base cover system
Automatic Doors

Place auxiliary static meshes – 6 Hours

Boxes/Barrels
Pipes etc.
Cafeteria Tables
Lights – delete development lights
Cells – may include geometry BSP brush work

Re-texture as needed < 1 Hour

Make changes as necessary based on feedback in and out of class

Periodically test level for scale and gameplay balancing < 1 Hour

Make changes as necessary based on feedback in and out of class

Take Screenshots/Video for in-class presentation < 1 Hour

Week 4 (10/9 – 10/16)

Complete set design – 7 Hours

Wall, ceiling, and floor décor
Move/Change meshes as needed based on testing and atmosphere

Add Items – 1 Hour

Ammo
Power-ups
Jump Pads

Re-texture as needed < 1 Hour

Make changes as necessary based on feedback in and out of class

Periodically test level for gameplay balancing < 1 Hour

Make changes as necessary based on feedback in and out of class

Take Screenshots/Video for in-class presentation < 1 Hour

Week 5 (10/16 – 10/23)

Polish set design – 4 Hours

Add necessary meshes, textures, and particle effects for a robust level

Polish gameplay – 4 Hours

Have an outside party play test level to see if it’s fun and make changes as necessary based on feedback

Periodically test level for completeness and gameplay balancing < 1 Hour

Make changes as necessary based on feedback in and out of class

Take Screenshots/Video for in-class presentation < 1 Hour

Week 6 (10/23 – 10/28)

Finalize level – 8 Hours

Make any necessary polishing to set design, level layout, and gameplay as needed based on feedback
Cook Level
Record final video presentation

Let's Level Design! - Vertical Slice UDK Developed CTF Level: Los Malditos

Pre-Production

Los Malditos Penitentiary - CTF built using UDK3

Gametype

Los Malditos is a Capture the Flag map that could theoretically be inserted into an FPS game that included a prison setting. Los Malditos will be developed in UDK3 because UDK already contains several assets and mechanics, perfect for First-Person Shooter Capture the Flag game types. Since Los Malditos is a CTF map, it will be multiplayer. Also, in order to best balance the map based on its small size, each team will be comprised of four players. The demographic that we are targeting with Los Malditos is 12 - 25 male and female players because this target audience comprises the majority of market sales in this genre.

Story

The inmates of the Los Malditos Penitentiary have rioted in response to the warden installing a furnace feeder in the middle of the cafeteria. After the riot, several cell blocks were destroyed and have since been blocked off for repairs. Unfortunately, this has lead to massive over-crowding within the prison and the guards have decided to force the inmates to play a deadly game of capture the flag for their amusement; as well as, cut down on the prison population. Unfortunately for the player, they are one of the lucky inmates selected to play. In order to survive and live to see tomorrow, they must kill the opposing team's inmates and capture their flag three times.

Gameplay

Los Malditos is a team-based CTF map; players must defend their own flag and capture the enemy's flag in order to win the game. Players are expected to either play defensively and/or offensively to accomplish this goal. To aid them, weapons, ammo, and health are placed strategically throughout the map along the five main routes around the map. A player's ability and their teammate’s ability levels will greatly influence the impact of how quickly a team can win. Additionally, knowledge of the map will also play a key variable in the game's outcome.

Los Malditos Paper Map

Additionally, the map contains a death pit which is controllable by players via a control room panel that floats above the death pit. Also inside of the control room is the rocket launcher. The decision to have only one entrance/exit into the control room and to have the rocket launcher spawn there is to heighten the sense of risk/reward. While players are rewarded with the most powerful weapon and the ability to open the pit and kill anyone unfortunate enough to be caught in the mayhem, players put themselves at great risk as they can easily be shot in the back and killed by another player.

In order to entice players to traverse over the death pit while it is closed, a power-up item is located in the center of the pit. These additions again adds to the risk/reward system for the map by encouraging players to both take chances, and try and kill other players with the death pit. Players will also have the ability to move some static meshes in their respective base via a terminal (done in kismet) in their base to add another dynamic layer to the map.

Visuals/Effects/Audio

The inspiration for this map comes from the Halo 4 map: Adrift and the Kyln prison from Guardians of the Galaxy. Using these as references the textures will be dark and metal looking, along with some concrete textures. However, the map will be well lit so players can see in all areas of the map. The intension is to create an intense and pseudo-futuristic/realistic environment for players to enjoy while fragging each other. The major draw of this level will be the symmetry that draws players to the central room which contains a giant death pit. The death pit is controllable by players via a control room panel that floats above the death pit. Also inside of the control room is the rocket launcher. The decision to have only one entrance/exit into the control room and to have the rocket launcher spawn there is to heighten the sense of risk/reward. While players are rewarded with the most powerful weapon and the ability to open the pit and kill anyone unfortunate enough to be caught in the mayhem, players put themselves at great risk as they can easily be shot in the back and killed by another player.

Reference Images

http://www.343industries.org/Halo-4/_/multiplayer-maps/adrift-r14

CTF - Los Malditos Feature List

Name	Priority	Completed
Matinee controlled doors	Moderate	No Longer Included
Matinee controlled moving boxes in base	Low	No Longer Included
Matinee controlled death pit	Critical	Yes

CTF - Los Malditos Asset List

Name	Priority	Completed
Cafeteria Tables	Moderate	Yes
Shower Static Meshes	Moderate	Yes
Security Room Static Meshes	Moderate	Yes
Prison Cells	High	Yes

Genre Discussion - Hack n' Slash/Beat em' Up

Hack n' Slash / Beat em' Up

I absolutely love the Hack n' Slash/Beat em' Up genre. On a personal level, the most enjoyment I had during my tween and early teen years came from Hack n' Slash games. On a professional level, this is the second most lucrative genre behind First Person Shooter games. They're fun, feature addictive mechanics, and interesting economic/item management systems. Now that we've entered the digital age and a large portions of games are transitioning to the "freemium" model, Hack n' Slash games have the potential to be the most profitable genre. However, I remember Beat em' Up games fondly from the 90's during the peak and fall of arcades. Most Beat em' Ups are designed so that players will eventually lose and must continue to feed the cabinet quarters. Unfortunately, this model did not translate well to the home market, leading to the genre being all but dead. In recent years, Beat em' Up games have had a resurgence in popularity with games like Castle Crashers and Battle Block Theater.

Whenever I think about "good" Hack n' Slash/Beat em' Up games I think of fast faced fluid combat, a variety of classes and/or weapons, tiered items, a strong loot drop system, and economy. Fast paced combat is a common theme between every Hack n' Slash and Beat em' Up game I have ever played or seen and is the core of the "fun" in a Hack n' Slash game. The combat also usually features pitting the player against varying types and strengths of enemies which ties into the loot drop system. To juxtapose the high adrenaline nature of combat, which is what the player will spend the most time doing, a good Hack n' Slash usually features travel times to balance the game pacing. Additionally, having an extremely wide variety of weapons/items with tiered uniqueness (e.g. common, uncommon, rare, and unique/"set" item) that drop all of the time. However, rarer item versions drop less often to keep the player addicted and coming back day after day playing for hours. Furthermore, this kind of loot system is the backbone of the game's economy (only applicable for Hack n' Slash since Beat em' Up usually only features linear items to boost the player's abilities for maximum combat vs. having to deal with vendors or trading with other players). While items are typically sold to venders for money, good Hack n' Slash games ultimately create a second economy system where top tier weapons, armor, and items are traded among players for either massive amounts of money or for other items.

The Diablo series is, and forever will be the best example of a Hack n' Slash game. Each iteration evolves the gameplay, art style, item system, and economy from the last. Even starting with the first Diablo game, it featured fast, adrenaline-pumping combat (albeit due in part to the player always moving at one single walk speed), a ton of different weapons, armor, and auxiliary items of ranging rarity - the most unique of which had custom models to further set them apart. In addition to the super fun gameplay, items, level-up system, and trading economy, Diablo also featured a super compelling story which urged the player to keep playing till the end. When the player does get to the end, the final confrontation with the game's titular boss feels well worth the effort and they are rewarded with a plethora of items for multiple playthroughs on harder difficulties and one of Blizzard's infamous cinematic sequences.

While I remember it fondly, Battle Toads may be the most famous worst example of a Beat em' Up game. Battle Toads is infamous for its extreme difficulty which stems from its origins in the arcade. Thus, it was designed so the player died often and had to continue feeding the machine money to keep playing. The game's visuals were fun and the gameplay was exciting which encouraged players to continue playing. However, this design is the quickest way to kill your game in the home console market. The game lives on as one of the most difficult games for the Nintendo Entertainment System - featuring friendly fire and environments that create poor spatial awareness for players. Thus, Battle Toads' rage-enduring friendly fire and lack of check points makes it an overall terrible Beat em' Up game.

Derek holds a Bachelor's Degree in Game Design and has two and a half years of game development experience. To view other work please visit www.dereksinex.com or his YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/JDKevlar

Genre Discussion - Strategy/RTS/Tower Defense

Strategy / RTS / Tower Defense

I absolutely love this genre. It's also probably the easiest genre to "get right". The mechanics seem to always be evolutionary as a standard across the genre since the mechanics are really what define the genre. That being said, the thing that sets games stand apart from each other tends to be the art, level design, and story. While my experience with Stategy and RTS games is on the more "hardcore"/AAA side of games, Tower Defense games are probably the only games I play that could be considered "Casual" or "Mobile".

The "good games" of this genre are the ones that really balance gameplay mechanics and a pleasing art style. Since Strategy and RTS games tend to be based around multiple races/factions it is absolutely fundamental that they be balanced. This usually comes down to having "rock-paper-scissors" balancing, but it works and why try and improve an already perfect system? As far as pleasing art style is concerned, this is a consideration because the most successful Strategy/RTS/Tower Defense games have a pleasing art style that is obviously developed along side the game's mechanics and lore. Included under the umbrella of art is level design, a factor which really sets each game apart. A large part of the gameplay in this genre, especially in the pro-circuit, is dependent on the game's levels and environments. For example, in StarCraft there are preferred multiplayer maps that are used in the pro-circuit due to their balance; while other, poorer-balanced maps, are banned from tournament play. Good level design in a Strategy/RTS/Tower Defense game varies the player's experience and allows for very repetitive gameplay to be extremely fun.

As mentioned above, I believe that the StarCraft Franchise is a genre leader in RTS, the XCOM series is a best example of Strategy, and BloonsTD is the best Tower Defense game I have ever played. StarCraft is a very obvious choice because each iteration features amazingly appealing art assets, industry defining cinematics, a compelling story line, a variety of fun levels, and perfection of the "rock-paper-scissors" mechanics. XCOM features the same things as StarCraft, but in the world of Strategy, a game can make it or break it based on its pacing; something which XCOM does a fantastic job of. The combat is relatively fast-paced for a Strategy game and is quite frankly a more exciting version of Chess. Lastly, I included BloonsTD because it excels at having a giant assortment of balanced towers/enemies. The player has a ton of control as there is no "one best way" to beat each map. The art and setting also helps the case for BloonsTD dominance because of its comical and cartoony fun.

Frankly, I cannot think of a "worst example" of a Strategy/RTS/Tower Defense game. I have not played a lot of Strategy games, and the ones that I have played are wonderful. I have played a lot of RTS games and since the mechanics are all extremely similar, all of the ones I have played are great. However, I am not a fan of the WarCraft series, simply because I played StarCraft first and I just don't like the visual style of WarCraft. As for Tower Defense though, there are a seemingly infinite amount of Tower Defense games. This oversaturation is bound to produce some stinkers which are usually in the form of free Tower Defense games. A single title does not come to mind, but I have played some poor TD games on newgrounds.com which did a poor job of balancing the towers and enemies, had unattractive visuals, and ridiculous level design that involved poorly designed enemy paths.

Derek holds a Bachelor's Degree in Game Design and has two and a half years of game development experience. To view other work please visit www.dereksinex.com or his YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/JDKevlar

Genre Discussion - Multiplayer Versus

Multiplayer - Versus

Personally, I love multiplayer versus games. I have been playing video games as far back as I can remember so the concept of play and strategy within a video game are intuitive to me now that I am an adult. However, computer AI, while it does have some variation game to game, is no where near as good as a human opponent and as I grew older I found myself wanting more of a challenge. Multiplayer versus gives you that challenge by pitting you up against other human players. Multiplayer versus is one of, if not the most popular genres in gaming today. Multiplayer versus turned playing video games from an individual experience to a social group experience. This transformation has caused explosive growth for the gaming industry, thus becoming a huge focus on the majority of big-budget games. Multiplayer versus is a wonderful genre as it fosters competitive play among individuals of all backgrounds and ability types. Additionally, the genre helps evolve the industry further by pushing technical and design boundaries for what can be handled on a gaming system through the changes in graphic fidelity, technical standards, server capabilities, and design innovation because so many games include multiplayer versus. This genre is a great vehicle for potential gross income since multiplayer versus, and multiplayer in general, is a social interaction where players can build relationships with fellow players; as well as encouraging their friends to purchase the game so they have someone to play with.

A good multiplayer versus game is one that is inherently balanced and fun. These are the corner stones with which to build any multiplayer experience because player skill level should ultimately determine the outcome of each match. This is not to say that a game is bad if it doesn’t feel balanced, but if top tier players of a game all refuse to use a certain character, weapon, class, or race; the game is not good. Since multiplayer is now almost exclusively done online, servers and match making play a huge part in what makes a good multiplayer versus experience within a game. So, the game must have a solid match making system where players of similar skill level, within a small range, play against each other. Otherwise, you will inevitably end up with first-time players playing with extremely top tier/experienced players. The far better players will of course massacre the new comers; creating a sub-par experience for both sides. The chances that those low level players will come back and play again decreases exponentially each time this happens. When a game has a well thought out and executed match making system, games are much more interesting, intense, and fun for players. A similar effect can be seen in real life sports. If a team is being blown out, fans are more likely to disengage and leave the game because it’s boring and not fun. When a game is close and the teams are more evenly matched, every play is much more exciting and increases fan engagement.

There are so many great examples of multiplayer versus games and when it comes to the best examples, the titles that come to mind are: Team Fortress (Classic and 2), Ultra Street Fighter 4, The Last of US, and a special case can be made for Planetside. These were definitely difficult choices, but I feel like the games I listed are really the best in their class.

The main reason I chose Team Fortress over its contemporaries like Call of Duty, Battlefield, Halo, Counter-Strike, and Left 4 Dead is for a personal reason. Out of the games listed, Team Fortress Classic, and now Team Fortress 2, is[are] the only game[s] I could play for a consistently long period of time without working towards a reward or extrinsic reward. Team Fortress to me is all about the pure joy of multiplayer versus and while you do collect/unlock items, they are either aesthetic only or you receive better items constantly so gameplay isn't effectively one-sided due to unlocked items. While, my main reason for explaining TF as the best example of a FPS multiplayer versus is personal, Team Fortress does so many other things excellently that earn it a top spot. Team Fortress is a class based game and the biggest advantage a team can have over another is having a well balanced team. No single class is absolutely better than another and the variety of level design and game types are so different from each other--even maps within the same game type are surprisingly different--thus, matches are won by the team; not a single player. Of course, if a player is truly good enough they can change the tide of a match, but again, a single player cannot do it all without the help of their teammates. The near perfect balancing is complimented by player run servers, who do a rather good job of policing themselves and unbelievably executed level design. Every level in Team Fortress and all the levels in Team Fortress 2 (as far as I know) all have a relatively simple layout ranging from two to four main paths that then branch and intertwine in key areas of the map. The environment art is detailed enough to make each level exciting and allowing for minimal set design so players have freedom to move around. Lastly, while the set design is minimal for most maps, the designers did a perfect job of placing ammo, health, and cover objects in areas where they are needed. This is seen more-so in Team Fortress 2 as many of the really well done maps are reconstructions of original Team Fortress maps. It's obvious they analyzed how players interacted in the original and tailored the new maps to ensure those great gameplay moments continued.

Ultra Street Fighter 4 was probably the hardest choice to settle on when declaring a best in class for fighting games. Personally, I prefer the Mortal Kombat series of fighters over any other, but from a development standpoint it is definitely not the best fighting franchise. The choice for Street Fighter came down to a simple deciding factor, and that is its impact on the professional gaming scene and the amazing community that has been built around Street Fighter. The mechanics of Ultra Street Fighter 4 are simple enough that players can master individual combos and special moves, but being able to master a character's move list and string combos together is much more complex. Also, a large part of the game is being able to read your opponents next move. Unlike other fighter games, button mashing does not win you matches because some of the more powerful attacks are only successful if your opponent pushes a button when the move is executed. So, experienced players use these kinds of moves and the button mashing newbies lose pretty easily. The design behind Ultra Street Fighter 4 is all about encouraging players to learn and get better at the game. I listed Street Fighter over Marvel vs. Capcom 3 because it is impossible to infinitely juggle in Street Fighter and I personally think that's a broken fighting mechanic which really is the core play-style MvC is based on. I.e. whoever lands the first combo wins.

I wanted to end my list with The Last of Us's multiplayer, but I wanted to mention Planetside because no other game I have ever played has mastered the massive scale, combat, variety of skills, classes, weapons, vehicles, and sense that you are a soldier in a war on a "real" planet like Planetside does. There are even subtle differences in the available weapons and vehicles for each of the game's three races, but they are all balanced in a way that you get a rock-paper-scissors effect -- yet no one race is inherently better than another. Plus, there's a massive and positive community powering Planetside.

The Last of Us is really an achievement in game development. The single player story is compelling, the mechanics are really polished, the level design is bar none. Naughty Dog created immersive environments that really look lived in and apocalyptic which no other game I have ever played, or seen has even come close to. The experience is further taken to another level with its multiplayer. Each level is skillfully crafted and gives off a sense of complexity due to the set design even though underneath, every map is a small box. Of course, some levels contain multi-story buildings or environments, but if you really boil them down each map is a linear box with essentially one way the player can go; and it is fantastic. Since the core game is based around resource management, the versus feeds off of that mechanic creating really exciting and dynamic matches. The final touch that puts The Last of Us multiplayer at the front of the pack is the added management of having survivors follow you. Every gamer I know, including myself gets a sense of responsibility and makes it more important to do well in a match so your survivors get resources and live.

There are several examples of games becoming bad multiplayer games after they have become obsolete or have severe bugs (recent Battlefield games), but I would like to focus on games that are considered complete and polished, yet they are terrible examples of multiplayer versus. While it was hard to come up with any, these titles qualify for being the worst examples: Most sports games, Aliens vs. Predator, and Assassin’s Creed 3. Please, take in mind that all of the poor example games are games that I have personally purchased, played, and have enjoyed on some level. However, this is a critique piece and as such, we will be discussing the aspects of these games that make them poor examples of the multiplayer versus genre.

All modern sports games (e.g. Madden, 2k Anysport, NCAA etc.) now come with an included online multiplayer versus mode where the player creates a team of players and plays head-to-head with another player who is using a team of players they assembled. The problem with these games is that the multiplayer is a tacked-on feature riddled with server unreliability and allows for players to essentially cheat by putting the very best players on their team. Additionally, the match-making systems are generally very poor and it is seemingly random who you will end up playing against since the game does not have an adequate system in place for tracking player skill.

I love the Predator and Aliens vs. Predator universes so I really tried hard to like the AvP game. However, the multiplayer versus mode is extremely lackluster and every match turns into a race for who can be an Alien because they are so incredibly overpowered that playing as one in versus breaks the game. The developers attempted to create a rock-paper-scissors gameplay experience, but given the abilities and stat attributes of each race and class; the game becomes completely one-sided. Adding to the broken mechanics, the level designs are wonderfully done and sadly, every map seemed to have been designed with one race in mind. The layouts are either super cramped with the majority of the level consisting of small ducts which only Aliens can enter, or huge wide-open maps with a maximum of two levels. To be clear, humans have the best chances when they have the auto-targeting machine gun, since movement is super twitchy, and a massive amount of free room. Predators have the best chances when they can get a height advantages and move from one form of cover to the next. Aliens have the best chance in tight areas, or areas with tall ceilings, maps with a lot of cover to hide behind, or huge open areas since they have a lunge attack that sends them flying through the air. Plus, Aliens have "hormone vision" so they can see humans and Predators through objects at all times--rendering the Predator's cloak ability useless. Poor design judgments, lack of servers, and aggravating gameplay causing plays to just quit so even if you find a server you'll be lucky if two other people join, makes Aliens vs. Predator a terrible multiplayer versus game.

Lastly we have Assassin's Creed 3. In a game where players spend most of their time running along rooftops, the entire design of AC3's multiplayer is counter-intuitive to that play style. Players are given a target and an indicator of how close they are to their target. However, sprinting and going up to roof-tops throws up a big red flag of "Hey, I'm a player! Come assassinate me!" because the only way not to be killed instantly is to pretend to be an AI controlled NPC. Guess what NPCs never do? Yep, sprint and run across roof-tops. While it is poor design judgment to penalize players for doing what they normally do in single player, this can be remedied easily by just not doing it. However, like the other "worst example" games, the match-making system doesn't care about player level at all. While this may not be a problem like in CoD games where the weapons a player gains access to at specific levels can be used to kill even the highest level player; it is in Assassin's Creed's multiplayer versus. High level players have access to extremely powerful abilities/weapons, like being able to see your target through Eagle Vision-negating any hiding tactics and silencing players in X range around you so they can't use any abilities. Ubisoft could have made the multiplayer experience much better by not designing the multiplayer levels exactly like the single player, and instead have some NPCs using environmental objects and run on rooftops. After all, in single player when guards are alerted they do chase the player along rooftops so the capabilities are there.

Genre Discussion - Stealth

Stealth

Stealth is probably the most difficult genre to develop a game correctly in. However, if you do it right, the Stealth genre may be the most rewarding/challenging/fun genres of them all. From a personal side, it took me until I was a young adult to enjoy the stealth genre because it requires an extremely high level of patience that young players simply have not developed yet. This balance is what makes stealth a unique genre that sounds out from all others.

A good stealth game has to be challenging so that the reward for being stealthy feels like an extreme victory. In order to help accomplish this, the mechanics, specifically the controls, must be perfectly balanced and fluid. A good stealth game also gives the player a multitude of choices for how they accomplish a task, or if they can only complete a task one way the challenge cannot be so overly difficult or complicated that the player just quits in frustration. Due to these requirements, level design becomes a major component of good stealth design. Typically stealth game levels begin to be designed around verticality, feeding on the strengths of the games mechanics; as well as, offering the player multiple horizontal routes.

There are several games that display great stealth mechanics like the Splinter Cell, Sly Cooper, Hitman, and Thief series. However, as far as recent games are concerned, Dishonored is the best stealth game I have ever played. Like its contemporaries, the player always has the choice to "go loud" or "be stealthy", but gives the player greater rewards for taking the extra time/effort to "be stealthy". Unlike its contemporaries though, the challenge the stealth route requires from players is balanced to where it feels do-able and more fun than just running around murdering everyone in sight. Additionally, the rewards for a stealthy approach are more tangible and the gameplay mechanics of having powers (i.e. teleportation, possession, slow down/stop time, etc.) really make it feel like the game was meant to be a stealth game. Lastly, Dishonored's level design featured environments that could be traversed both vertically and horizontally based on how the player wanted to tackle an area/objective; a design which I have never seen another game master.

When I think of bad stealth games, I think of games that were so frustrating that, despite being designed to be played stealthily, "stealth-ing" was impossible due to the design/mechanics of the game. The games that come to mind when I think about this situation are the Hitman games prior to Hitman: Bloodmoney. The main reason that the early Hitman games are such terrible stealth games was their clunky and unbalanced controls. In order to silently take out targets, the player had to crouch walk - which any enemy's normal walking speed was faster by a factor of at least two and no enemy stayed still longer than a second or two, and push the action to garrote the enemy - an action that triggered a slow executing animation that had to be preformed when the Player Character was essentially touching the intended target. More often than not, this tactic failed, rendering a stealthy approach nil impossible. Furthermore, trying to stealthily take out a target and failing meant raising the alarm and again voiding an attempt at stealth. This made for a rage quit-inducing frustration and is the perfect example for why stealth games are so hard to do well.

Derek holds a Bachelor's Degree in Game Design and has two and a half years of game development experience. To view other work please visit www.dereksinex.com or his YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/JDKevlar

Genre Discussion - Multiplayer Co-op

Multiplayer - Co-op

Multiplayer co-op is an amazing genre and my personal favorite sub-genre, but is difficult to get right in today's world of game development. When I was growing up my family primarily played single player point-and-click adventure games, but the wide-spread adoption of the internet changed the way I played games; as well as how the industry as a whole developed games. When games first featured co-op it was endearingly called "couch co-op" because in order to actually play cooperatively, all players had to be together, in-person. By taking advantage of online capabilities, players no longer need to be together in one place in order to play co-op and thus, created a larger profit margin since each player needed to purchase a copy of the game in order to play together. As I said earlier, I love multiplayer co-op games because I would much rather play with someone, rather than against them; especially if I'm playing with friends. As an adult, most of my gaming purchases revolve around online co-op because I longer live in close proximity to most of my friends so online co-op is an extremely fun way to stay in touch. In fact, I find most games that feature co-op within the last eight years are only fun when I play it with a friend.

The definition of a "good co-op game" is very subjective since most, if not all, games include multiplayer co-op and the experience depends very largely on player interaction. Of course, a good co-op game is not entirely in the hands of the player. The success and popularity of a multiplayer co-op game revolves around the designed pacing, objectives, and customizable options the player has. Additionally, having a robust match-making systems also signifies a good multiplayer co-op game. Players need to be able to create their own lobbies or find their own by categorizing what they are looking to do to a "T". Furthermore, good multiplayer-cop games always seem to include levels that are extremely unique from one another. As such, level design plays a huge part in whether players find a co-op game fun or not. Special consideration needs to be taken by developers to give players multiple objectives, routes, or scenery to "live in" while playing the game. In the following best examples, all three games (series) feature realistic feeling levels that could be places in real life. The take away from that, is when it comes to level design, developers should focus on realistic environments in a game environment even if the game scenario is far-fetched (i.e. apocalypse, space ship, alien world, etc.)

While I have never had a bad co-op experience playing with a friend due to the design of the game itself, the best in show for games that were specifically developed for multiplayer co-op are: Payday 2, the Left 4 Dead series, and the Gears of War series. Payday 2 is a FPS game designed entirely for multiplayer co-op play, as every player is on the same team trying to complete various heist missions. The levels are all uniquely designed for each mission scenario and feature a meta game of giving the players the option to complete each mission completely stealthy, partially stealthy, or "go loud" or "guns blazing". The match-making system is very well done and robust as players can create public or private lobbies, set level caps, and multiple difficulties for each mission give another indication of recommended level. When a player searches for a game, they can also filter by all of these criteria. The co-op experience is also supported by voice/text chat and an extremely strong community-developer relationship. The Left 4 Dead and Gears of War games also feature these great mechanics that make them some of the best multiplayer co-op games. Left 4 Dead also takes the idea of cooperative to another level. While the game's A.I. is good enough that it is not required to have other players, playing with other people in Left 4 Dead creates an entirely new narrative to the story where players can share in their misery, or revel in their success as they battle through each level. A similar experience is created in the Gears of War franchise, where players are given the immersive feeling that they are part of a small squad of soldiers in war. Thus, it is extremely advantageous to play with someone else as you can coordinate your efforts to beat each level.

I have never personally played a game where I thought "the co-op in this game sucks". However, I have had experiences where I loved playing a game in single player, then I played it cooperatively with a friend, and then I found it impossible to go back to playing single player because I found no joy in the game without playing with friends. The game that comes to mind when I think of that kind of experience, is Dead Island. Dead Island featured drop-in, drop-out co-op but the only option for finding a multiplayer match outside of having a friend invite you directly to his game, or vise-versa, was just hitting a "join multiplayer" button. The game would just automatically throw you into the closest open game to you with a host that was in the same "physical" game location to you. So theoretically, a level 5 players could be thrown together with a level 20 player just because the level 20 player went back to the starting area for whatever reason. Another hindrance to this system was that it would pause the game for the host and any active players when a new player would join the game. However, one of the main game features was that there was no real pause system since Dead Island is a survival horror game. The loading system caused huge disruptions in the gameplay flow and would often result in lag-induced deaths of current players. As a counter-point and final thought, I found Dead Island to be one of my favorite games of all time. The overall mechanics, inventory system, items, quests, and level design were some of the best I have seen in my entire life despite the poor execution of the drop-in/drop-out system and the single player was only ruined because the game was just way more fun with a friend and they got four copies out of us, so kudos to Deep Silver.

Derek holds a Bachelor's Degree in Game Design and has two and a half years of game development experience. To view other work please visit www.dereksinex.com or his YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/JDKevlar