Lighting and Map Balance vs Aesthetics
Diabolik
Join Date: 2010-03-31 Member: 71128Members
Join Date: 2010-03-31 Member: 71128Members
I'm sure this has already been discussed in length, but a search turned up nothing.
Is there any general consensus amongst experienced mappers and players as to if/how lighting should effect the balance of gameplay in NS maps? Or do you entirely go about lighting intuitively and just sort of see what works for each room? Just to be clear, I'm talking about very subtle differences in lighting. I don't think it should effect balance much at all - just enough to maybe give each side a little edge near their respective starting locations, and provide a slightly more balanced experience in contested areas. Outside of that, used to create unique landmark rooms (as outlined in the mapping guidelines). Appropriate and interesting geometry, as well as performance concerns taking priority, of course.
Haven't played NS in over 6 months (something I'm about to fix), but I remember a general trend of dimmer and more organic lighting in alien rooms vs. more artificial and bright lighting in rooms closer to marine start. Not only does it make aesthetic sense, but it plays to each side's strengths and adds to that feeling that you've entered enemy territory once you head out into the map.
I've also been working under the assumption that smaller + darker rooms favor aliens (melee), while larger + brighter rooms favor marines (ranged). As such, whenever I create a large room I've been providing a dimmer route within/around it to give smaller aliens an alternative to running out into the spotlight, except when it makes sense. Smaller rooms I'm trying to keep generally bright so they don't become deathtraps that marines hesitate to go through. I don't want the lighting uniform and uninteresting across the entire map, however. How often do you have rooms that may be skewed one way or the other?
I know there is no rule that will work in every situation, and you have to look at each map as a whole - I'm just looking for input. Also, if you can think of a particular ns1 map that has what you consider to be both immersive <i>and</i> balanced lighting, point me to it. I'm reinstalling to have a look.
Thanks!
Is there any general consensus amongst experienced mappers and players as to if/how lighting should effect the balance of gameplay in NS maps? Or do you entirely go about lighting intuitively and just sort of see what works for each room? Just to be clear, I'm talking about very subtle differences in lighting. I don't think it should effect balance much at all - just enough to maybe give each side a little edge near their respective starting locations, and provide a slightly more balanced experience in contested areas. Outside of that, used to create unique landmark rooms (as outlined in the mapping guidelines). Appropriate and interesting geometry, as well as performance concerns taking priority, of course.
Haven't played NS in over 6 months (something I'm about to fix), but I remember a general trend of dimmer and more organic lighting in alien rooms vs. more artificial and bright lighting in rooms closer to marine start. Not only does it make aesthetic sense, but it plays to each side's strengths and adds to that feeling that you've entered enemy territory once you head out into the map.
I've also been working under the assumption that smaller + darker rooms favor aliens (melee), while larger + brighter rooms favor marines (ranged). As such, whenever I create a large room I've been providing a dimmer route within/around it to give smaller aliens an alternative to running out into the spotlight, except when it makes sense. Smaller rooms I'm trying to keep generally bright so they don't become deathtraps that marines hesitate to go through. I don't want the lighting uniform and uninteresting across the entire map, however. How often do you have rooms that may be skewed one way or the other?
I know there is no rule that will work in every situation, and you have to look at each map as a whole - I'm just looking for input. Also, if you can think of a particular ns1 map that has what you consider to be both immersive <i>and</i> balanced lighting, point me to it. I'm reinstalling to have a look.
Thanks!
Comments
Too dark of areas will aid the Aliens. Too bright of areas will aid the Marines. It's ok to have some dark places and some bright places, but generally everything should be pretty neutral.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've also been working under the assumption that smaller + darker rooms favor aliens (melee), while larger + brighter rooms favor marines (ranged).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For NS1 that's very true. For NS2 we just don't know yet. Take the skulk for example. It has more HP, but is bigger, but has leap, but moves slower. That's a <i>crap ton</i> of big changes to the most fundamental unit and it's really hard to judge how it will play using theorycraft.
If I were a mapper I would focus on a solid layout while constructing rooms that I would think would play well, maybe even without lights (although they look so cool in Spark). I would try to make everything modular so I could cut and paste if need be. Lighting may be something we have to wait and adjust for later once we know how NS2 flows.
What I'm curious about is how that will work out with the Tech points. Especially how a room can switch from well lit (marine controlled) to dark (alien advantage) while maintaining certain balance AND atmosphere.
And in any case, maps can be reworked: go see Eclipse from 1.0x and see how bright it has become.
<img src="http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/2298/wipmstheta2rp.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Lighting, and some other things, can differ greatly between players, therefore you should avoid relying on lighting for gameplay.
However there is no reason that aesthetics and gameplay should be opposed, the two should both be excellent.
<!--quoteo(post=1762006:date=Apr 1 2010, 03:52 AM:name=ssjyoda)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ssjyoda @ Apr 1 2010, 03:52 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1762006"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->you can always go the way of james cameron.. use a subtle blue light for areas that are meant to be dark. think terminator 2, aliens and true lies.. anyone remember how much blue light he used?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I thought he just dropped the master copy of aliens in a bowl of blue dye.
Lights are expensive from a design point of view.
Yeah but then you have people yelling at you "ITS TOO DARK!"
Apparently all you need to do is make the falloff larger and less intense, or something :p
<b>THEN MAKE IT BLOOM LOLOLOLOL</b>
My advice: Adding props is not the only way to improve aesthetics. I've seen some really nice rooms with lots of props, but just the same, adding lots of props can hinder both the aliens and marines. I wouldn't want to fight in a room that made me worry about getting stuck on props. Over-propping the floorspace of a room, I believe, hinders overall gameplay much more than it hinders one particular side. Don't let props exclude someone from a room.
Lighting (which I'll get to later), and architecture are useful tools for making a room interesting.
The Onos Rule: Pretend your marines are the size of an Onos. Marines should never be able to position themselves such that an Onos cannot get into melee range of them. In application, anywhere marines can go, an Onos should be able to go, too.
Another really important thing to remember when building a map is something I like to call the "TF2 Rule". In Team Fortress 2, every location has at least two ways to get to it. You'll never find "perfect" cover; there's always a back door. With this in mind, maps should probably be designed with at least two ways into and out of a given area for all sides. A marine should never feel safe unless his ability to shoot aliens is compromised, just as an alien should never feel safe unless its ability to bite marines is compromised. Everyone should have a chance to fight back.
There are two main applications of the TF2 Rule: doors and exposure.
Doors: Every room needs at least two doors if you plan on people fighting in it. Generally, each door should grant access to a different half of a room, and share different points of view. For example, if you build a square room with a node of some sort in the center, the best places for doors would be at different corners of the room, or on opposite walls. In a very balanced room, I should never be able to see all of a room's doors at the same time unless I put myself at a large disadvantage.
Exposure: No matter where I stand in a room, at least two other people should be able to place themselves such that they can both fire at me (or bite me), and prevent me from seeing both of them at once. In a very balanced room, I should only be able to look at one of them, or the other, from the time they enter the room to the time they are in position.
The goal of the TF2 Rule is to require players to use teamwork when protecting a location.
I think it's very important that players should be able to accomplish more with teamwork than individual skill.
Lighting:
I think the best application of lighting uses contrasting areas of luminescence. If a room is too dark, neither aliens nor marines will be able to see what they're doing, and too much light can be an eyesore. But, darkness appears darker if you look at it from a well-lit room, and vice-versa. Alternating areas of relative brightness and darkness goes a long way towards building suspense without using extreme levels of lighting, like a map devoid of lights. You can also use lighting to improve a map's atmosphere and provide suspense. A dark, forbidding room is a lot less menacing when every room is dark and forbidding.
If I wanted to, I could probably rig up some kind of Gamma macro that I would basically work like a game-breaking flashlight.
It doesn't really matter, because as others have said, NS is much more about <i>feeling</i> dark than actually not being able to see.
It doesn't really matter, because as others have said, NS is much more about <i>feeling</i> dark than actually not being able to see.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And then you have Eclipse/Veil where it 'feels dark' by being bright ###### orange?
That said I don't understand why we even need gamma adjustments. It's 2010 for ######'s sake, and frankly even on a CRT I never needed it.
That said I don't understand why we even need gamma adjustments. It's 2010 for ######'s sake, and frankly even on a CRT I never needed it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To be perfectly honest, none of the maps really make sense. The labyrinthine corridors are wonderfully atmospheric, but I cannot for the life of me imagine why the interior of a spaceship or an orbital facility would be composed of long, convoluted hallways leading to nowhere and encompassing an enormous amount of useless space. The maps represent establishments designed for human use in environments where every square foot is a million-dollar investment...so what the hell where their engineers smoking when they took those parameters and came up with a floor plan like this?
<img src="http://ns2wiki.com/images/thumb/c/c7/Origin_overview.png/300px-Origin_overview.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Sure, it feels like something right out of <i>Aliens</i>, but when you stop to think for a second you notice how blatantly artificial it is.
(apologies if I've just ruined NS for anybody)
Dude, this space ship totally needs more halls and stuff so that you can fly between the hallways.....
I'm tempted to say "screw realism, I have gameplay". However, I think you can assume several other passages are blocked off and these weird access corridors are the only real ways left to traverse. Place a lot more locked doors on your maps!
well the curvy hallways and n+1 amount of 90 degree turns are result of engine restrictions. you just couldn't have realistic layouts with HL engine with detailed look of NS. it was either nice atmospheric map or a siege map.