4.4.1
Background
‗Lorian‘ started as a University project on the BSc Computer Video Games programme in practice-based games design module, and was my first real foray into openworld games development (small scale map). The goal of the project was to create a playable Quake3 level (map), a popular games engine at the time. The project was more of a creative production challenge than ‟problem solving‟.
4.4.2
Process of Development
1. Sources of Inspiration
The project was grounded by King‘s Bounty (a game on the Sega Megadrive) and the experience I had after playing the game extensively, after which the notion of linking gameplay to how the environment looked and was experienced for the first time. The project was focused on creating „believability‟ in the gameworld rather than
realism, as experience and reflection led me to believe that it was emerging as a strong factor in immersive games.
Environmental archetypes psychological factors linking narrative to environment. Inferred narrative of environmental archetypes.
2. Development Processes
Lorian was unique in that an attempt was made to develop a landscape design process; this involved:
Codifying Environmental Archetypes
Developed system for expanding on Environmental Archetypes into region features Aligning environmental design with gameplay through environmental gameflow
and thematic design
Technical design processes included:
Heightmap creation from game flow diagram
2D environment heightmap to 3D environment format Terrain texture generation through digital photographs
Integration and balancing of other assets (sound, music, models) into the environment
4.4.3
Review
1. Form & Function
The project created a functional Quest 3 map (Figure 17); this was a functional multiplayer map and performed well in basic test runs with a small number of players. Ultimately Lorian was essentially a prototype to test the process of design and VNE design in particular whilst the technology was rudimentary by today‟s (2015) standards.
2. Usability/Feedback
The game looked impressive and different i.e. novel. However, feedback from users included the following comments:
a boring map (not much to do)
the environment design supersedes the game‟s design thus gameplay is compromised
the world is small scale as such the environment is quickly traversed The virtual world looks empty
Figure 17: Screenshots of Lorian: Quake 3 Level
3. Project Outcomes
Table 8 offers the list of outcomes for the project and the location of supporting materials.
Table 8: Lorian Project Outcomes
Outcome
Section/Location
Lorian Design Document Appendix B: Lorian design
Lorian Video 1 Digital media drive
4.4.4
Reflection
1. Intention versus Realisation
The original intention was to create a rich environment; however the actual implementation differed due to technological constraints and a lack of design knowledge and experience. Added to this was the realisation that the design solely rested on aesthetic considerations of how the environment looked, but what was needed went beyond traditional artistic demands, and involved a process of deeper landscape design; that did not seem apparent when the project commenced. A surprise was the design stage was enjoyable and very productive, and established a design process that was effective at managing feature creep and the creative brainstorming stage. In addition the design stage started to address the equilibrium between inspiration, reference and emotional narrative. A final realisation was made in those flaws down at the technical stage of balancing gameplay with environmental design (which is one aspect of the overall games design).
2. Artefact Successes & Failures Successes:
Aesthetically impressive for the period and comparative to other environments in the user community.
Design stage included natural environment „archetypes‟.
The design process developed was unique (archetypes to features to thematic flow to 2d heightmap to 3d env map).
The creation of a logical, reusable and documented design process (concept of shared knowledge, this could be used as reference point for other to jump off and to learn, from private knowing to shared reusable knowledge).
Failures:
Failed to balance/align environment design with gameflow design
Limited natural landscape references used to reinforce believability and hence immersion
Limited use of photograph to texture conversion The art process and design process were inseparable
Codifying Environmental Archetypes were not based on reference or any other foundation such as narrative, mythology or research.
Limitations of Technology: The software/game engine was limited in the ability to convey real world, the variety of manifestations of landscape features such as water (rain versus waterfall versus stream) and complex lighting (specular, diffuse), limited capability of engine to handle complex assets („ambient assets‟).
3. Effect on personal practice
The effects on personal practice included a realisation and recognition that environmental design was a fascinating extension of previous interests such as mythology and writing. As a practitioner, I developed both technical proficiency and artistic skill in landscape design due to the project, and documenting the process was invaluable in creating a reusable process (i.e. distilling/extracting knowledge from the artefact). The initial inquiry started to provoke questions about the relationship between technology, art and design in creation of an artefact i.e. design is a manufactured solution to the problem, which is delivered through technology, manifested as art into an artefact.
4.4.5
Further Questions
1. What is the relationship between technology and design? In particular games hardware/software and design.
2. What are the existing methodologies in environmental/landscape/terrain design?