Fallout 3 dev diary: level design

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
The newest dev diary comes from the Fallout 3 level designing team and talks about level design.<blockquote>This exposed perhaps our most daunting design challenge; how do we communicate to the player who has been conditioned to expect to “complete” a level that D.C. is just too big to tackle in a sitting?

The game world is filled with tiny cues to try and communicate to the player that they should leave from time to time and return later. Most players realize soon into exploring downtown that the scope of the area is expansive. Character dialogue reinforces that the city is vast and dangerous. Connective areas are generally very short, and share a naming convention to reinforce that they aren't full-length level experiences, while full fledged levels are given names unique and more meaningful – such as the Museum of Technology or the Capitol Building – to hint at the nature of the level within. Expeditions into the heart of the city also tend to be much more trying than encounters in the Wasteland around Vault 101, the player's starting point. Low-level characters can expect to run home licking their wounds if they venture very far into the municipality of post-war D.C. There are also many discoverable map markers in the ruins. Each of these provides a fast travel point to return to as well as a small experience point reward for finding them. These cues serve as a sort of optional checkpoint system, reminding the player that they can take a trip to town, sell loot and rest up, then easily return to this spot to resume scavenging D.C. at a later time.

We also filled D.C. with small stories to help build the larger arc of the player’s experience. These stories are side quests from our quest designers, traditional levels with their own secrets to uncover, or one of numerous terminals, notes or recordings. Fallout is a world rife with the unfinished tales of lives cut short by nuclear holocaust, as well as those of unlucky survivors who scrabble out a meager life from such dire circumstances. With such a deep well from which to draw inspiration, time was the only limit on how many tales could be told. D.C. is full of these stories, told through any combination of text, dialogue, or more subtle venues.

The written word is a powerful and direct tool for storytelling. Much of our storytelling as level designers, however, is told with the voice of the world. For every space in the game, however minor, we asked ourselves “why is this here” and “what’s happened here?” Even when this back story isn’t conveyed directly to the player, it informs even minor level design decisions and lends an honest quality to the space. A lonely grave, a heap of human gore, or a long-abandoned outpost convey atmosphere and meaning without a single written word. These small stories all contribute to both the truth of setting and the unique narrative of each player’s experience playing Fallout 3. Their distribution through the world is designed to intersperse the player experience with more punctuation marks to keep time playing the game from blending into a hazy, forgettable miasma.</blockquote><center> </center>

Thanks Ausir.
 
We also filled D.C. with small stories
They certainly "filled" it, if the complaints about how crowded areas can be are any indication. Still, from what I have seen, the level design certainly is interesting and has good art direction.
 
well, I think people forget to consider the difference in scale between this game and previous games.

For comparison sake:

FO1 and 2 took place along the entire eastern seaboard, whereas FO3 takes place in the LA Boneyard. Its just you get to explore every nook and crany of LA Boneyard.
 
Texas Renegade said:
FO1 and 2 took place along the entire eastern seaboard, whereas FO3 takes place in the LA Boneyard. Its just you get to explore every nook and crany of LA Boneyard.
I'm sure you mean the equivalent of, and I definitely see your point. Unfortunately, it seems to come at the cost of the desolation which helped define the atmosphere of the previous two. Definitely something that I will miss. :|
 
Well, yeah I was switching the settings of the games around.

I don't have an issue with wishing the game design was different, but in the actual setting of the game, there isn't any room for desolation.

Now, if they had stuck some huge random generated wasteland on the outer edges of the city that would be cool.

I do have to agree that this mistake can be blamed on their terminology though. They consider the suburbs of DC the wasteland....when in reality they are not--they are the area of land inhabited between DC metro and the wasteland.
 
hmm, I just gotta ask:
In the second screenshot, bottom right, is that a skeleton child riding a plastic horse with its frozen arm lifted to shield its face, in a gesture of sad futility?

Or my sleep deprived eyes are just seein' things. We all know they are immortal, and mere nukes cant hurt them!
 
Westbend said:
hmm, I just gotta ask:
In the second screenshot, bottom right, is that a skeleton child riding a plastic horse with its frozen arm lifted to shield its face, in a gesture of sad futility?

Or my sleep deprived eyes are just seein' things. We all know they are immortal, and mere nukes cant hurt them!

Well it looks like the remains of a child still astride the motorized rocking horsey outside a store. Though it looks like both the arms are still clinging to the horse, so no face shielding I guess.

Though from the interview it seems that the fast travel system will return in all its glory. The only thing now is to see if they have more or less map markers than oblivion.
 
Fast Travel works how I like it - at the beginning of the game, you have to walk everywhere on foot - but only if you want to return to previously visited location, you can use fast travel. I really like it this way (I can't imagine walking EVERYWHERE all the time manually), because the initial exploration is intact, plus it makes sense (VD doesnt know the world, unlike citizen of Cyrodiil).
 
But it doesn't make sense for there not to be any random encounters during fast travel.
 
Ausir said:
But it doesn't make sense for there not to be any random encounters during fast travel.
Took the words out of my mouth. Fingers. Whatever. :P

Since traveling between areas in Baldur's Gate is more similar to TESIV and FO3's fast travel than Fallout 1/2's travel method, I'll use that for the following... Even though I hated when it happened, I did think it a neat feature that every so often during travel between areas I'd be attacked. I mean, with bandits and mercenaries all over the place at one point, wouldn't it make sense to be ambushed sometimes? Does the world in Oblivion or Fallout 3 suddenly become empty when you decide to use fast travel?
 
how do we communicate to the player who has been conditioned to expect to “complete” a level

Behold... Bethesda's view of their target audience.

In reality, even the console gamers played their share of of games which "cannot be completed in one sitting" and are not "divided into levels". They're not that stupid.
 
Texas Renegade said:
but in the actual setting of the game, there isn't any room for desolation.
Why because it's set in a single city? Or because it's set in a small part of a single city? They could of easily given the same sense of desolation from the setting of a single city, in fact if done right they could gain a greater sense of desolation from setting the game in a single city. We expect the countryside (especially if it's a desert to begin with) to be empty just as you expect cities to be busy. There's nothing so erie as an empty city, ever been out to a city center in the early hours of a sunday? It's a very disconcerting feeling to walk around without a soul in sight, a feeling some of the best PA books and films have captured.

Out of all it's flaws, the game being set in a city has to the least important (if even a flaw), people tend to forget that cities are huge, especially if you are on foot. The problem isn't the setting it's the design.
 
Ausir said:
But it doesn't make sense for there not to be any random encounters during fast travel.

I don't mind that. In FO1 and 2 I loved special random encounters - easter egg ones. But the usual shootouts against raiders or geckos or whatever weren't as exciting.If there are random encounters during actual playing (on foot), I am okay without them during fast travel.
 
i think a lot of it is perspective

if you look at the size of maryland, its quite small compared to california.

they are used to small worlds and since its a highly developed area, they have no concept of a wasteland.

in calif, just head north and east and you can hit the desert areas and see a wasteland.

cant do that in maryland or pretty much anywhere on the eastern side of the US.

and then even when they do travel, they only travel to "developed" areas such as huge/main cities.

to them, they probably do think FO3 being the size of DC is desolate and empty.
 
I don't mind that. In FO1 and 2 I loved special random encounters - easter egg ones. But the usual shootouts against raiders or geckos or whatever weren't as exciting

Absolutely right. And as I'm pretty sure that Bestheda will not put ANY easter egg or humor in the encounters, they'll all be the damn same thing, I think I can live pretty well without it
 
radiatedheinz said:
I don't mind that. In FO1 and 2 I loved special random encounters - easter egg ones. But the usual shootouts against raiders or geckos or whatever weren't as exciting

Absolutely right. And as I'm pretty sure that Bestheda will not put ANY easter egg or humor in the encounters, they'll all be the damn same thing, I think I can live pretty well without it

From what I've seen so far, any opportunity to avoid combat is probably a blessing. It shouldn't be that way, but that's the reality.

Most of these action RPGs become stupidly boring at some point (Dungeon Siege, Sacred, Oblivion, etc.), and I end up just wanting to race to the end with as little combat as possible. After the first couple of gates, I started doing speed runs through the Oblivion maps, using invisibility to run past all the enemies, through the same tedious 3 or so repeating levels.
 
To this end, we focused on combining the visual focus of level design in other first-person titles like Doom 3 or Call of Duty 2 with the exploration aspect of games like Beyond Good and Evil or any Zelda title.
Where they got their destruction aesthetic inspiration from?

So, instead of D.C. being an enormous, open area on the world map, we hatched a plan to focus on the individual areas and neighborhoods of the city. Each of these neighborhoods is its own large outdoor area. This allowed us to clearly define the personality of every neighborhood and specifically tailor gameplay to populate each. Further, the player must navigate treacherous underground areas to move from one neighborhood to another, as many of the surface-level city streets are completely buried under heaped hillocks of debris from shattered structures.
Sounds like the source of the over population in areas. Also I really hope that they didn't over use having to use underground routes to move around the city and that there are alternate above ground routes which also reach there (anyone know? I haven't heard it mentioned as a problem from the gameplay footage nor mentioned in any of the previews [though I remember similar things being said and criticised earlier]).

One of our usual level design concerns is to avoid the player exploring and clearing a level, only to have to backtrack through empty hallways to escape.
Someone didn't read the criticism of Oblivion.

For D.C., achieving a believable world design involved allowing multiple ways in and out of an area. We created alternate routes that circled back to an exit or, especially downtown, allow the player to pop up in a new location entirely. This elegantly avoided the issue of back-tracking, but made it more difficult to design gameplay to be compelling regardless of the player’s direction through it.
Like this solution.

The largest continuous set of tunnels allows the player to reach almost any neighborhood without needing to go above ground, negotiating derelict train tunnels and frequently passing through mingled areas such as collapsed basements and natural caves exposed within the decaying underground
A few is fine, a lot is not.

This is in response to one our own criticisms of Oblivion, echoed by many fans of that game, which was the amount of repetition in dungeons. Though we must re-use art assets out of necessity when creating such a large game, we made time for every space to be built and iterated upon by hand by both level designers and artists.
The other solution is not to make levels beyond what you have the resources to make interesting.

Ausir said:
But it doesn't make sense for there not to be any random encounters during fast travel.
I said this in another thread, it depends on what type of game you're making. The problem with Bethesda is that they aren't honest with consumers, they claim to be making a standard RPG "only better" when in fact they make games that are action focused (ARPG) games that more similar singleplayer, MMORPGs. In ARPGs the focus of the game is on action with leveling up and loot being the results of said action and the key is to minimize distractions from said action (like going to town, running around with no enemies, ect). Fast travel is an excellent way to minimize those distractions (though with the amount of loot and weight systems [the latter being the real problem in an ARPG] in Beth games, the system needs to allow you to return to exactly where you left) but in games that aren't focused on action (ie killing), said system feels extremely awkward.

Now Bethesda should start addressing this problem by being honest about the type of games they make (which might require some examination if they aren't sure) and then weigh whether their individual systems help to achieve their goal and focus or damage it. If a system does some of both then they should examine it and determine whether or not their is an alternative which is more beneficial (Fallout map travel system instead of their fast travel [or at the very least, some combination of the two] for example).

shihonage said:
how do we communicate to the player who has been conditioned to expect to “complete” a level

Behold... Bethesda's view of their target audience.

In reality, even the console gamers played their share of of games which "cannot be completed in one sitting" and are not "divided into levels". They're not that stupid.
Yep and it's part of the problem, they underestimate the consumer.
 
Leon said:
Ausir said:
But it doesn't make sense for there not to be any random encounters during fast travel.
Took the words out of my mouth. Fingers. Whatever. :P

Since traveling between areas in Baldur's Gate is more similar to TESIV and FO3's fast travel than Fallout 1/2's travel method, I'll use that for the following... Even though I hated when it happened, I did think it a neat feature that every so often during travel between areas I'd be attacked. I mean, with bandits and mercenaries all over the place at one point, wouldn't it make sense to be ambushed sometimes? Does the world in Oblivion or Fallout 3 suddenly become empty when you decide to use fast travel?

See I allways considered it to be a rather lame blow off to making more content. One of the things I loved about Baldur's Gate 1 was that you had to wander all over the damned place to find a new map. The backwards fast travel was ok, but even when you jumped back to the new area, you only appeared on the edge. And the only way to get out of an area was to find the edge of the map, you couldn't just "jump" to another way point if you were lost or etc.
There was something nice about the way they did Morrowind, with it being ungodly huge and you being forced to explore the damned thing. How much memory does a square of empty wasteland with random monsters take up really? Now Oblivion, fine, I get it, it's a capital full of forests. Lots of stuff you have to cram in there. But Fallout 3? I think a return to Morrowind's rolling empty wasteland idea would have fit right in.
You don't relly need fast travel on a map as small as Oblivion's unless it's from city to city so you don't have to walk from one side to the other.
But the oblivion method where there was a map marker every damn quarter mile or so was pushing it and I fear that's the direction they've taken Fallout 3.
 
yeah

how do we communicate to the player who has been conditioned to expect to “complete” a level

Ok, it was said earlier but that quote makes me really sad... again.

There's nothing wrong with fast travel. Except if it is totally safe fast travel, ie no encounters.

Absolutely right. And as I'm pretty sure that Bestheda will not put ANY easter egg or humor in the encounters, they'll all be the damn same thing, I think I can live pretty well without it

Which is kinda sad. Easter Eggs, when delivered in moderation, are funny.

But the usual shootouts against raiders or geckos or whatever weren't as exciting.

Oh yes, that is a true shame /sarcasm. Because, like, who cares that you might meet dangerous/annoying enemies when traveling the wasteland. IF ITS NOT 100% MEGA-FUN WE HAVE TO DROP IT!
Besides, geckos were for skinning and raiders were for loot. It made perfect sense to fight them if you could beat them. And you ALWAYS had the chance to run away - so I really do not understand your whining about that feature. Just click towards the map edge.
 
Back
Top