05-21-2015, 06:20 PM
I don't want to write a post about 10,000 topics, so I'll just focus on one thing I haven't seen anyone say too much about already.
When it comes to most genres, I'm pretty big on environmental design. In fact, I find that its importance is often equal to or greater than the characters and story, so I think it's a topic that deserves more focus.
Probably the most obvious thing about environmental design is the actual art (drawings, models, sprites...). People tend to associate "fun" with "gameplay," and arguments about graphics in AAA games lead many people to claim, "the graphics don't matter! Who cares what it looks like?!" But if you think about it, the graphics in a game are not at all unrelated to the amount of fun you have, and gameplay can only get you so far.
The very act of looking at good art is fun, isn't it? How often have you found yourself admiring images on the Internet? Considering the amount of time you spend staring at the art while playing a game (y'know, the entire time), having good assets in your environments can create a higher level of fun than good gameplay alone can create. Like, level 99 gameplay is good, but level 99 gameplay with level 99 environmental art is better.
(As a side note, the problem with the graphical obsession is the fact that many people have a narrow definition of what good graphics are, not that people care about good graphics.)
This is all rather superficial, though. There are things about good environmental design that are more important than having pretty art, including mood, points of interest, and interactivity. I've enjoyed environments with mediocre graphics as long as they've nailed these points!
Mood is pretty obvious. When all of the elements of a game work together to create a specific atmosphere, they tend to generate more impact than a nonspecific or generic atmosphere would. Think horror games or weird old Rare titles.
Environments, of course, are a pretty big part of what makes an atmosphere. More impact tends to make you feel more engaged (sometimes to the point that you can call yourself invigorated!), and that means more fun for you. Mood also contributes to worldbuilding, and worldbuilding makes you feel more invested, and that means more fun for... you get the idea, right?
The next thing, which is a real big one for me, is the inclusion of points of interest. Environments that lack points of interest can be pretty hard to remember. Environments that do have them, however, are memorable because they give our minds something to hone in on. That's entertaining in the long run when we can reminisce about all the moments we had in those particular places. Also, points of interest tend to act as landmarks that make you feel like you're actively having an adventure rather than passively going through some levels. They grab your attention and wake you up a bit, so to speak.
Nothing has to be extremely overt to be a point of interest, but just having variety can be enough. For example, I wouldn't call the cyclops statues in the dungeons of LttP a "wow" factor, but they give the dungeons some character and differentiate them from the dungeons of other games. On the other hand, if there's too much crap crammed into a level, that can mean that nothing stands out. Even if the assets look well-done when taken individually, it can be hard to care about that particular area as a whole.
Another issue is when there are definite points of interest, but they're so uniformly planned and lacking in spontaneity that they become routine and less interesting. I have that problem with Kirby: Triple Deluxe.
Some examples of points of interest include the little arches you fly under in Corneria, the eel in Dire Dire Docks (which you could call a "character," but I'd say the little hole with the eel in it is an environmental thing), tons of stuff in Wind Waker and TTYD, the arcades and little capsule machines in Shenmue, the special buildings in Mega Man Legends (museum, town hall, stores...), or even the checkerboard pattern and weird sunflowers in Green Hill Zone.
If you think about it, without its little details and quirks, Green Hill Zone would just be an extremely boring grass level. Some of you might still think it's boring because opinions and all that, but the base images are iconic enough that they can be used in multiple Sonic games as a throwback (even if they seem to do it too often).
Something of a subcategory for points of interest (if I haven't used that term enough!) is interactivity. Not all games need it, but isn't it great when you can play with something in the environment? I like interactivity for a lot of the same reasons I've already gone over. It helps you feel like an active participant in an adventure, it gives you good memories, it creates variety, etc. Levers and buttons, hidden or destructible objects, minigames, usable instruments, botherable NPCs, platformable dinosaurs, whatever! Even little doors that make satisfying sounds are fun for some reason.
Overall, when it comes to environmental design, it's the little things that add up to create something I really appreciate. It seems like a lot of games are too afraid to include things that stand out or are particularly unusual, or are at least too unwilling to make that extra push. This can be particularly true for games in longrunning series that already have a defined identity. Mario games, for example, don't really interest me anymore because all of the environments, while fairly well-made in a general sense, stick to what's been established and don't do much to surprise you or break the mold. I pretty much feel like a zombie when I play games like that, no matter how good the gameplay is. I beat Mario Galaxy, but I honestly barely remember anything about it because there's nothing for my memories to focus on...
Regardless of my feelings about Mario, I think it's worth considering the specifics about which parts of environments you've enjoyed. I see people talk about this subject every once in awhile, but the discussions tend to be general and unfocused. Those types of discussions seem to miss the meat of what make an area fun to play in. If you want to understand environments, then I really think it comes down to the specifics!
When it comes to most genres, I'm pretty big on environmental design. In fact, I find that its importance is often equal to or greater than the characters and story, so I think it's a topic that deserves more focus.
Probably the most obvious thing about environmental design is the actual art (drawings, models, sprites...). People tend to associate "fun" with "gameplay," and arguments about graphics in AAA games lead many people to claim, "the graphics don't matter! Who cares what it looks like?!" But if you think about it, the graphics in a game are not at all unrelated to the amount of fun you have, and gameplay can only get you so far.
The very act of looking at good art is fun, isn't it? How often have you found yourself admiring images on the Internet? Considering the amount of time you spend staring at the art while playing a game (y'know, the entire time), having good assets in your environments can create a higher level of fun than good gameplay alone can create. Like, level 99 gameplay is good, but level 99 gameplay with level 99 environmental art is better.
(As a side note, the problem with the graphical obsession is the fact that many people have a narrow definition of what good graphics are, not that people care about good graphics.)
This is all rather superficial, though. There are things about good environmental design that are more important than having pretty art, including mood, points of interest, and interactivity. I've enjoyed environments with mediocre graphics as long as they've nailed these points!
Mood is pretty obvious. When all of the elements of a game work together to create a specific atmosphere, they tend to generate more impact than a nonspecific or generic atmosphere would. Think horror games or weird old Rare titles.
Environments, of course, are a pretty big part of what makes an atmosphere. More impact tends to make you feel more engaged (sometimes to the point that you can call yourself invigorated!), and that means more fun for you. Mood also contributes to worldbuilding, and worldbuilding makes you feel more invested, and that means more fun for... you get the idea, right?
The next thing, which is a real big one for me, is the inclusion of points of interest. Environments that lack points of interest can be pretty hard to remember. Environments that do have them, however, are memorable because they give our minds something to hone in on. That's entertaining in the long run when we can reminisce about all the moments we had in those particular places. Also, points of interest tend to act as landmarks that make you feel like you're actively having an adventure rather than passively going through some levels. They grab your attention and wake you up a bit, so to speak.
Nothing has to be extremely overt to be a point of interest, but just having variety can be enough. For example, I wouldn't call the cyclops statues in the dungeons of LttP a "wow" factor, but they give the dungeons some character and differentiate them from the dungeons of other games. On the other hand, if there's too much crap crammed into a level, that can mean that nothing stands out. Even if the assets look well-done when taken individually, it can be hard to care about that particular area as a whole.
Another issue is when there are definite points of interest, but they're so uniformly planned and lacking in spontaneity that they become routine and less interesting. I have that problem with Kirby: Triple Deluxe.
Some examples of points of interest include the little arches you fly under in Corneria, the eel in Dire Dire Docks (which you could call a "character," but I'd say the little hole with the eel in it is an environmental thing), tons of stuff in Wind Waker and TTYD, the arcades and little capsule machines in Shenmue, the special buildings in Mega Man Legends (museum, town hall, stores...), or even the checkerboard pattern and weird sunflowers in Green Hill Zone.
If you think about it, without its little details and quirks, Green Hill Zone would just be an extremely boring grass level. Some of you might still think it's boring because opinions and all that, but the base images are iconic enough that they can be used in multiple Sonic games as a throwback (even if they seem to do it too often).
Something of a subcategory for points of interest (if I haven't used that term enough!) is interactivity. Not all games need it, but isn't it great when you can play with something in the environment? I like interactivity for a lot of the same reasons I've already gone over. It helps you feel like an active participant in an adventure, it gives you good memories, it creates variety, etc. Levers and buttons, hidden or destructible objects, minigames, usable instruments, botherable NPCs, platformable dinosaurs, whatever! Even little doors that make satisfying sounds are fun for some reason.
Overall, when it comes to environmental design, it's the little things that add up to create something I really appreciate. It seems like a lot of games are too afraid to include things that stand out or are particularly unusual, or are at least too unwilling to make that extra push. This can be particularly true for games in longrunning series that already have a defined identity. Mario games, for example, don't really interest me anymore because all of the environments, while fairly well-made in a general sense, stick to what's been established and don't do much to surprise you or break the mold. I pretty much feel like a zombie when I play games like that, no matter how good the gameplay is. I beat Mario Galaxy, but I honestly barely remember anything about it because there's nothing for my memories to focus on...
Regardless of my feelings about Mario, I think it's worth considering the specifics about which parts of environments you've enjoyed. I see people talk about this subject every once in awhile, but the discussions tend to be general and unfocused. Those types of discussions seem to miss the meat of what make an area fun to play in. If you want to understand environments, then I really think it comes down to the specifics!
![[Image: sxv5uJR.gif]](http://i.imgur.com/cqpCy.gif)