Hey everyone, time for a cheeky plug - since doing this talk, I've started doing my own level design youtube videos, which you can watch on my channel. If you like this talk and don't mind seeing more of my face, feel free to go take a look 👍 (The link's been kindly added to the video description: ruclips.net/user/stevelee2) (P.S. Some of you may be pleased to know that I don't touch my nose so much in these videos.)
Very useful stuff. Just saw a video of yours and this talk too is helping me writing a case study of narrative design in Dishonored for a university assignment. Nice work.
2:45 The three parts: presentation, gameplay, story 5:38 An example: a level in Dishonored 2 9:04 His level 12:36 "Players don't look up" - about affordances 15:31 Weak Intentionality 16:44 Dishonored example 17:46 The 4 things players need to act with intentionality 18:56 Keys to facilitate intentionality 22:28 Intentionality affects linearity perception 24:43 Part 2: World Building 25:40 World Building Tips 34:57 Part 3: Interactive Narrative 35:26 The phrase "Show Don't Tell" and why it isn't useful for interactive narratives
Yeah I was a bit nervous - a bit shy, a bit stressed about managing to say everything the right way, without missing things out, on the day. Glad you like the talk though 👍
16:45 encouraging players to come up with their own ways of solving problems 23:14 alignment of what the player want to do what they have to do 25:05 design or present situations in such a way that players will naturally learn the thing that you want them to do, but they will fell that it was their idea all along 31:22 stories are always about people 39:40 deliberately designing scenes to encourage with intentionality; scenes are not supposed to be watched, but designed to be interrupted and interacted with and have extra lines and scripting beyond the main scene in order to react to player’s choices 42:26 HL2's "pick up the can"
I found this really informative. There is such a desire to ramroad the player into seeing what you want them to see, and doing exactly what you want them to, to progress through your creation. It's so easy to forget about the need to give players freedom that doesn't feel disingenious because they will insinctively feel it. Evoke don't tell is something I also really need to work on after watching this. There are other ways I can convey without actually telling. Thank you!
There's this other GDC talk called "10 Principles of Good Level Design." One of those principles is "Good level design tells the player what to do, not how to do it." The Dishonored assassination mission example is a perfect showcase of this. The player knows that they must eliminate the target but that's it. It's up to them to plan how to approach the situation and plan their way through the environment.
I would love to know how narrative and mechanics evolve throughout the development process. In (your) dust district, for example, there's dust storms that serve two purposes at once. For one, they function as a new stealth mechanic that can be used creatively to proceed in the level, on the other hand it makes you experience firsthand what the district's history has amounted to and what its people are suffering from. So it sort of fulfills all three "links" shown in your presentation. Is this a chicken-and-the-egg issue or were for example the dust storms something handed to you by the writers that you then iterated upon on a mechanical level? Or the other way around?
Thank you very much. This is definitely a valuable GDC talk for me. I'll try practicing and applying this approach. (But it will take time and practice)
I have saw other level design videos and talks and more often developers discussed about the same. I thought game writers are doing interactions for the level integrated in the story.
Nice talk and great job on Dust District. The Jindosh riddle is awesome, I spent some time solving it, so rewarding. Although I only did it on a no powers playthrough because I didn't want to miss out on the runes and bonecharms. Had to replay it again once you said you could find Corvo's old home though. I was just wondering how much time goes into creating such a level? What do you even start with? How far advanced is the game in terms of AI, powers design and so on when you get started on this level and how much does it change as some of the design changes?
Thanks for replying! That is so cool. Why did you leave Arkane though? Sounds like Dishonored 2 was pretty close to the type of level design you enjoy, are they not planning on making more of the stuff besides DLC?
Does it get tiring working on big projects for so long? I'm a student in game art and for now all the games (prototypes really) I've worked on were short and because the team was small I've always had a big involvement in them, which I enjoy because I feel like it's my game. However I enjoy mostly AAA games but I don't really know what it's like working on one.
Great talk! Im glad you point out interactive storytelling, this is a thing that i felt but not analysed and sadly so many games i played pass through it. During my first run, i totally skipped Dust District, what a surprise i got when i replayed the game ;).
Excellent talk. Especially the part about intentionality, as this has given me a deeper insight into what it is that I like in games. I used to use the word "Agency" to describe it, but I think this concept of intentionality(which isn't a word? But it should be!) describes it more accurately. In contrast, I profoundly disagree that all stories are about people. I mean, personally, my favorite video game stories of all time are in the Souls games, and especially Bloodborne, and in these games, the story is more about the world than the characters, and I think that this is better for video games because you can't interact with a personality, so by making the story about the world that you are exploring and trying to conquer, it enriches the gameplay itself in a way that I've never seen in any other game. Dishonored is actually the closest thing to it, though! Unlike many supposed "story-driven games", the story in a Souls game is present in every frame. As a direct result of what I'll call the "story world" approach(because the story is everywhere that you look), the Souls games are constantly transmitting story information to the player at all times (without ever taking control away from the player!) and because of that, it gives you the impression that there's no difference between story and gameplay, and that's a level of cohesion that is rarely reached. Dishonored also does a very good job of this. I think that games will never be able to compete with the Cinema when it comes to characters. Games can, however, create far better worlds than movies can, and so personally, I'd love to see more of this, and less focus on characters.
Not sure if there is a point in bringing up a discussion 3 yrs after but I think you are mistaking "context of the story" and generally "story information" for the story. Story is driven by actions, which are driven by Actors who, in most cases, are characters. And even more specifically, only the actions that move the plot contribute to the story. Situations where the world becomes an actor are not rare, but I think you are talking about something else. A letter pinned to a wall is not an actor but if a player comes to the letter and reads it, then still just the player is the actor.
@@Mikefiser I've upgraded my views since then. Or, you could say that I've articulated them better: I'm not fart-sniffing in the slightest when I say this but Souls style storytelling is just art. A lot of it isn't environmental, but it all falls under the umbrella of art. For example, if you go to an art exhibition and look at a piece of art you'll see how each element within the frame enriches the whole. Nothing is out of place. This is what the Souls games do, and I think this is why Miyazaki refers to them as "Painted Worlds". They take a very artistic approach to their worlds, that's all it really is, with all of the symbolism and metaphor that that entails. I think that calling it "environmental storytelling" puts it in this box that is unrepresentative of what it actually is.
I worked with him trying to make a John Woo inspired game. Unfortunately, my skill set at the time was not good enough. Nowadays... :D Good to see him doing good things.
I think this approach should be taken carefully because: 1-) Too much focus on AFFORDANCES will lead to dull level design. ie: Final Fantasy XIII corridor-like design or even many corridor-caves in the Rise of the Tomb Raider are perfect examples of that. It can be perceived as patronizing or in the case of the examples above it can downright kill many gameplay elements simply by streamlining level design to the point of "the one true path" being the only thing left. 2-) For obvious reasons, heavy emphasis on player INTENTIONALITY is at odds with emergent gameplay, which can be specially problematic for open world games or immersive sims. OTOH, there is something to be said about the merits of the lack of player intentionality (which the speaker dismisses as simply bad level design). Case in point: St. Francis Folly (Tomb Raider/Anniversary). IMO this level design is 1 of the best in gaming and it basically commits all of the "sins" mentioned in the talk and yet it provides a more immersive experience precisely because of that. A-) The level is filled with switches, levers and potentially even keys the player can interact with without knowing exactly why depending on how the level is approached. This is eventually subverted and turned into a net positive though: 1 way or another, the player will have to reach the bottom of the level and interact with the exit door, revealing it requires 4 keys in order to be opened (which automatically also reveals the objective of the level). Either way, it adds to the sense of wonder, mystery and exploration precisely because it ommits clear affordances/intentionality at 1st. B-) On top of the above, the omission of Affordance/Intentionality in older Tomb Raider games in general is simultaneously WORLD BUILDING simply due to how the premise of these games work: the player may not immediately know what those levers/switches means and that's alright since they are contraptions from ancient civilizations, usually protecting some sort of great treasure or secret. From the gameplay POV, every interactive element has a definite function so the blind start always add up to a greater understanding of the puzzles at large (without any unnecessary exposition at that). C-) Due to the same premise mentioned above, these supposedly bad practices are also INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING. The player doesn't know how the contraptions work at 1st but Lara is an archaeologist so she has specialized knowledge the player doesn't have, often times offering commentary about the surroundings and key items.
Re-watching this video after getting the book, The Design Of Everyday Things, and seeing the pet peeve which the author goes on and on about is funny. Namely, using the term "Accordance" when you mean "Signifier"
Yeah I've thought about this a bunch, after seeing other people using the term Affordances differently in other talks, so you're probably right. I must've misread something somewhere, my bad! (Update, 5 months later) I just listened to the audiobook version to re-inspect this, and it turns out that the whole thing about Signifiers is something he expanded upon in more recent editions of the book, to clarify what he meant by Affordances. I read the book at uni about 15 years ago, which was probably the original version, so this explains why I came to things without using the term Signifiers :)
Phenomenal video, I’ve learned a lot from this video that I plan to implement into my next project. Clean explanation that allows any competency-level to gain knowledge from.
1:26 I'm not too sure about Bioshock Infinite being an inmersive sim, when it has so little inmersive simulation involved. I mean, with the repeated sudden changes from peaceful enviroments to violence with little reasons for them and how liberal the usage of supernatural phenomenon is, I can't say I get inmersed in the world itself during gameplay (taking into account the extremely short parts where you can interact with it without inmediately trying to kill you) as I do during cutscenes. No idea about Dishonored 2 though, haven't played it.
essellessell Wow if you really are him then rock on. Didn't know of the "immersive sim" genre until just some weeks ago and realized it's the perfect genre for me. Prey, dishonored 1/2, Bioshock series, Deus ex series all incredible games imo. Arkane studios needs to keep making these immersive sims no matter if it's dishonored or a new I.P because with Bioshock ending and Deus ex devs announcing they're working on a damn tomb raider game, no one is making immersive sims but you guys.
So he's talking about avoiding the twitching and how its affect intentionality... and he's from the same studio that made Prey(howewer its from another division). I mean no offence, and I loved prey, it is build on a lot of points from this presentation, but its a bit self - contradictory, isnt it?
All I'd say is that the twitchy mimic / combat stuff is only one moment-to-moment layer of a very multi-layered game, and most of the other layers go very deep on the intentionality thing (gameplay and narrative). Really different to the example I give (Doom 3), I think.
The meta here is the speech itself is poorly designed with the chick sitting next to him drawing our visual attention for the duration. It's unavoidable just as the geometry and light you would use to design a level
You would do well to deeply research the phrase "Everything flows". The philosophy behind this saying will lead you down The Obscure yet enlightened paths, and eventually to Cybernetics, which is the science of governing dynamics and true underpinning of the methods you espouse...
it means approaching a problem from multiple angles. For instance, you could approach a coding job from a "all I care about is how this game is coded" point of view, while a holistic approach would mandate considering how your work will effect gameplay, art, animation, etc.
All tips he gives just seem to be from the first Dishonored, it's hard to tell what is his personal contribution to the design philosophy or if he just applied the formula made up in the first one...
How come? Was it because you prefer clear steps while going through a game? Like, wanting to escape from thinking hard about anything for a bit? Or was the game confusing, like it always felt like you didn't know where to go next?
@@peterlantz7966 what? No. Because it becomes a game of what did the designer think the player wanted to do in this situation in which thinking about systems interactions and how to use them is replaced with you looking for the design breadcrumbs for strategy a or strategy b. It's a recursive, high minded approach that ignores its recursion and mistakes a player recognizing that they're being given discrete options as far more agency than it actually is.
@@elcidbob I think I see what you mean now. So its like... It would be more fun to spill the legos on the floor and let players go crazy with how they connect, as opposed to giving them part of a finished model to complete? I think? Whether I get it or not, thank you for replying!
@@peterlantz7966 exactly, the focus on intentionally from the designer standpoint results in obscured gameplay, not emergent. It is admittedly a bit of a tenuous distinction because outside of some kind of randomizer, a designer can't fully divorce themselves from how players may go through a section, but there's a difference between having a variety of gameplay elements present and selecting a variety of gameplay elements so that a player can think their way through a situation before committing to action. The latter more strongly reinforces functional fixedness through the visual language the designer uses to breadcrumb the solutions that they've pieced out. And to be clear, I'm not saying any of this is bad, just more it's not my cup of tea because it feels a bit patronizing and unsatisfying because after a bit, you realize you're not doing something new and clever but just doing exactly what the devs intended.
I hope next time they dont put a cute girl next to the speaker so i dont have to watch the speech twice cause at first i was just kind of staring at her all the time and not really listening.......................
Daveyo89 Maybe on the consoles. I am on PC and I want my money back. I literally cannot finish the game because of where I am at doesn't render above 7 fps. I have 2 EVGA 1070's and this game is an unoptimized POS if I still can't play it to this day. To be fair I have heard from console players it was an enjoyable game...if you can finish it.
Couldn't get past the first ten minutes...sounds like the guy is actively trying to innovate the dead, empty sandbox full of locked doors and pretty pretty oh so pretty NON INTERACTIVE torches and candelabras and paintings of concept art in NPCs f*cking houses. He is an eater of worlds and a creator of none. This has put me off Dishonored, which is a real waste but after a game like BotW, where practically every object and surface is interactive; Listening to this mug tripping over his own presentation on how to make Cutting Corners a staple of the Industry, is just such a huge bummer.
I agree that a lot of games have many non-interactive elements, but I wouldn't say thats a BAD thing in of itself. Taking away options allows the game to focus on stuff that is fun for that particular game. Even BOTW has its own set of non-interactive elements if you think about it. Its about setting the stage for the type of challenges the game is all about. Some stuff is extra/distracting, some stuff is actually interesting.
That's a recurring flaw in the Dishonored series: the binary moral system more often than not weirdly presents the most disturbing choices as the righteous or low chaos ones.
@@15awesomehighfive This is on purpose. None of the non-lethal solutions to dealing with targets in the Dishonored games are presented as "righteous". They're deliberately designed to be dark - a fate worse than death, often with a sense of irony or poetic justice - to add some interesting complexity to their morality
None of the non-lethal solutions to dealing with targets in the Dishonored games are presented as "good guy options". They're deliberately designed to be dark - a fate worse than death, often with a sense of irony or poetic justice
Hey everyone, time for a cheeky plug - since doing this talk, I've started doing my own level design youtube videos, which you can watch on my channel. If you like this talk and don't mind seeing more of my face, feel free to go take a look 👍 (The link's been kindly added to the video description: ruclips.net/user/stevelee2)
(P.S. Some of you may be pleased to know that I don't touch my nose so much in these videos.)
Hey Steve! We'll go ahead and add a link to your channel in the video to help folks find it. Thanks again for giving such a great talk!
@@Gdconf Ah nice one - cheers :)
Very useful stuff. Just saw a video of yours and this talk too is helping me writing a case study of narrative design in Dishonored for a university assignment. Nice work.
2:45 The three parts: presentation, gameplay, story
5:38 An example: a level in Dishonored 2
9:04 His level
12:36 "Players don't look up" - about affordances
15:31 Weak Intentionality
16:44 Dishonored example
17:46 The 4 things players need to act with intentionality
18:56 Keys to facilitate intentionality
22:28 Intentionality affects linearity perception
24:43 Part 2: World Building
25:40 World Building Tips
34:57 Part 3: Interactive Narrative
35:26 The phrase "Show Don't Tell" and why it isn't useful for interactive narratives
The guy didn't seem really comfortable on his talk, but this was 50 minutes of pure gold
Yeah I was a bit nervous - a bit shy, a bit stressed about managing to say everything the right way, without missing things out, on the day. Glad you like the talk though 👍
This was awesome. Really chill, down-to-earth dude, and explained stuff in detail without getting too technical. Bravo 👏🏼
And he looks cool
I sleeping on it. This is sooo boring and there are not too much to learn the techniques missing here
I think this is the best talk I've seen on level design!
He said it. He said my favorite words. Observe, plan, execute.
Really insightful! I love how he draws from other schools of design.
16:45 encouraging players to come up with their own ways of solving problems
23:14 alignment of what the player want to do what they have to do
25:05 design or present situations in such a way that players will naturally learn the thing that you want them to do, but they will fell that it was their idea all along
31:22 stories are always about people
39:40 deliberately designing scenes to encourage with intentionality; scenes are not supposed to be watched, but designed to be interrupted and interacted with and have extra lines and scripting beyond the main scene in order to react to player’s choices
42:26 HL2's "pick up the can"
I found this really informative. There is such a desire to ramroad the player into seeing what you want them to see, and doing exactly what you want them to, to progress through your creation. It's so easy to forget about the need to give players freedom that doesn't feel disingenious because they will insinctively feel it. Evoke don't tell is something I also really need to work on after watching this. There are other ways I can convey without actually telling. Thank you!
There's this other GDC talk called "10 Principles of Good Level Design." One of those principles is "Good level design tells the player what to do, not how to do it." The Dishonored assassination mission example is a perfect showcase of this. The player knows that they must eliminate the target but that's it. It's up to them to plan how to approach the situation and plan their way through the environment.
I would love to know how narrative and mechanics evolve throughout the development process. In (your) dust district, for example, there's dust storms that serve two purposes at once. For one, they function as a new stealth mechanic that can be used creatively to proceed in the level, on the other hand it makes you experience firsthand what the district's history has amounted to and what its people are suffering from. So it sort of fulfills all three "links" shown in your presentation. Is this a chicken-and-the-egg issue or were for example the dust storms something handed to you by the writers that you then iterated upon on a mechanical level? Or the other way around?
Thanks so much for posting this!
Thank you very much. This is definitely a valuable GDC talk for me. I'll try practicing and applying this approach. (But it will take time and practice)
I keep looking on that girl next to him, trying to be invisible.
Come on, she's cute ;)
She is also giving a talk ?
Question: does level designer make assets and place them in the level or only makes sketch of the level and story in the level ?
I have saw other level design videos and talks and more often developers discussed about the same. I thought game writers are doing interactions for the level integrated in the story.
Question about Jindosh's house. Are moving parts of the house rigged and animated inside 3D software or inside the engine ?
Nice talk and great job on Dust District. The Jindosh riddle is awesome, I spent some time solving it, so rewarding. Although I only did it on a no powers playthrough because I didn't want to miss out on the runes and bonecharms. Had to replay it again once you said you could find Corvo's old home though. I was just wondering how much time goes into creating such a level? What do you even start with? How far advanced is the game in terms of AI, powers design and so on when you get started on this level and how much does it change as some of the design changes?
Thanks for replying! That is so cool. Why did you leave Arkane though? Sounds like Dishonored 2 was pretty close to the type of level design you enjoy, are they not planning on making more of the stuff besides DLC?
Does it get tiring working on big projects for so long? I'm a student in game art and for now all the games (prototypes really) I've worked on were short and because the team was small I've always had a big involvement in them, which I enjoy because I feel like it's my game. However I enjoy mostly AAA games but I don't really know what it's like working on one.
Great talk! Im glad you point out interactive storytelling, this is a thing that i felt but not analysed and sadly so many games i played pass through it. During my first run, i totally skipped Dust District, what a surprise i got when i replayed the game ;).
Amazing presentation! Inspirational!
Excellent talk. Especially the part about intentionality, as this has given me a deeper insight into what it is that I like in games. I used to use the word "Agency" to describe it, but I think this concept of intentionality(which isn't a word? But it should be!) describes it more accurately.
In contrast, I profoundly disagree that all stories are about people. I mean, personally, my favorite video game stories of all time are in the Souls games, and especially Bloodborne, and in these games, the story is more about the world than the characters, and I think that this is better for video games because you can't interact with a personality, so by making the story about the world that you are exploring and trying to conquer, it enriches the gameplay itself in a way that I've never seen in any other game. Dishonored is actually the closest thing to it, though! Unlike many supposed "story-driven games", the story in a Souls game is present in every frame. As a direct result of what I'll call the "story world" approach(because the story is everywhere that you look), the Souls games are constantly transmitting story information to the player at all times (without ever taking control away from the player!) and because of that, it gives you the impression that there's no difference between story and gameplay, and that's a level of cohesion that is rarely reached. Dishonored also does a very good job of this.
I think that games will never be able to compete with the Cinema when it comes to characters. Games can, however, create far better worlds than movies can, and so personally, I'd love to see more of this, and less focus on characters.
Not sure if there is a point in bringing up a discussion 3 yrs after but I think you are mistaking "context of the story" and generally "story information" for the story. Story is driven by actions, which are driven by Actors who, in most cases, are characters. And even more specifically, only the actions that move the plot contribute to the story.
Situations where the world becomes an actor are not rare, but I think you are talking about something else. A letter pinned to a wall is not an actor but if a player comes to the letter and reads it, then still just the player is the actor.
@@Mikefiser I've upgraded my views since then. Or, you could say that I've articulated them better: I'm not fart-sniffing in the slightest when I say this but Souls style storytelling is just art. A lot of it isn't environmental, but it all falls under the umbrella of art. For example, if you go to an art exhibition and look at a piece of art you'll see how each element within the frame enriches the whole. Nothing is out of place. This is what the Souls games do, and I think this is why Miyazaki refers to them as "Painted Worlds". They take a very artistic approach to their worlds, that's all it really is, with all of the symbolism and metaphor that that entails. I think that calling it "environmental storytelling" puts it in this box that is unrepresentative of what it actually is.
Amazing talk!
Cheers :)
I worked with him trying to make a John Woo inspired game. Unfortunately, my skill set at the time was not good enough. Nowadays... :D
Good to see him doing good things.
Thanks!
Literally downloaded every book he showed us
I think this approach should be taken carefully because:
1-) Too much focus on AFFORDANCES will lead to dull level design. ie: Final Fantasy XIII corridor-like design or even many corridor-caves in the Rise of the Tomb Raider are perfect examples of that. It can be perceived as patronizing or in the case of the examples above it can downright kill many gameplay elements simply by streamlining level design to the point of "the one true path" being the only thing left.
2-) For obvious reasons, heavy emphasis on player INTENTIONALITY is at odds with emergent gameplay, which can be specially problematic for open world games or immersive sims.
OTOH, there is something to be said about the merits of the lack of player intentionality (which the speaker dismisses as simply bad level design). Case in point:
St. Francis Folly (Tomb Raider/Anniversary). IMO this level design is 1 of the best in gaming and it basically commits all of the "sins" mentioned in the talk and yet it provides a more immersive experience precisely because of that.
A-) The level is filled with switches, levers and potentially even keys the player can interact with without knowing exactly why depending on how the level is approached. This is eventually subverted and turned into a net positive though: 1 way or another, the player will have to reach the bottom of the level and interact with the exit door, revealing it requires 4 keys in order to be opened (which automatically also reveals the objective of the level). Either way, it adds to the sense of wonder, mystery and exploration precisely because it ommits clear affordances/intentionality at 1st.
B-) On top of the above, the omission of Affordance/Intentionality in older Tomb Raider games in general is simultaneously WORLD BUILDING simply due to how the premise of these games work: the player may not immediately know what those levers/switches means and that's alright since they are contraptions from ancient civilizations, usually protecting some sort of great treasure or secret. From the gameplay POV, every interactive element has a definite function so the blind start always add up to a greater understanding of the puzzles at large (without any unnecessary exposition at that).
C-) Due to the same premise mentioned above, these supposedly bad practices are also INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING. The player doesn't know how the contraptions work at 1st but Lara is an archaeologist so she has specialized knowledge the player doesn't have, often times offering commentary about the surroundings and key items.
wait, you could shot a saw blade with an anti-grav gun in HL2?
41:07 that's so true!
Re-watching this video after getting the book, The Design Of Everyday Things, and seeing the pet peeve which the author goes on and on about is funny.
Namely, using the term "Accordance" when you mean "Signifier"
Yeah I've thought about this a bunch, after seeing other people using the term Affordances differently in other talks, so you're probably right. I must've misread something somewhere, my bad!
(Update, 5 months later) I just listened to the audiobook version to re-inspect this, and it turns out that the whole thing about Signifiers is something he expanded upon in more recent editions of the book, to clarify what he meant by Affordances. I read the book at uni about 15 years ago, which was probably the original version, so this explains why I came to things without using the term Signifiers :)
Phenomenal video, I’ve learned a lot from this video that I plan to implement into my next project. Clean explanation that allows any competency-level to gain knowledge from.
Very cool
i love your accent
goldmine
I love dishonored
So much value!
1:26
I'm not too sure about Bioshock Infinite being an inmersive sim, when it has so little inmersive simulation involved. I mean, with the repeated sudden changes from peaceful enviroments to violence with little reasons for them and how liberal the usage of supernatural phenomenon is, I can't say I get inmersed in the world itself during gameplay (taking into account the extremely short parts where you can interact with it without inmediately trying to kill you) as I do during cutscenes.
No idea about Dishonored 2 though, haven't played it.
essellessell Wow if you really are him then rock on. Didn't know of the "immersive sim" genre until just some weeks ago and realized it's the perfect genre for me. Prey, dishonored 1/2, Bioshock series, Deus ex series all incredible games imo. Arkane studios needs to keep making these immersive sims no matter if it's dishonored or a new I.P because with Bioshock ending and Deus ex devs announcing they're working on a damn tomb raider game, no one is making immersive sims but you guys.
You're correct, Infinite is not an immersive sim.
Yo this guy looks cool as fuk
Good talk.
Also 25:22
Huehuehue niiice
0:48 breaking with its own rules, eh? :p joke aside, thank you for uploading this incredible amazing talk!
So he's talking about avoiding the twitching and how its affect intentionality... and he's from the same studio that made Prey(howewer its from another division). I mean no offence, and I loved prey, it is build on a lot of points from this presentation, but its a bit self - contradictory, isnt it?
All I'd say is that the twitchy mimic / combat stuff is only one moment-to-moment layer of a very multi-layered game, and most of the other layers go very deep on the intentionality thing (gameplay and narrative). Really different to the example I give (Doom 3), I think.
The meta here is the speech itself is poorly designed with the chick sitting next to him drawing our visual attention for the duration. It's unavoidable just as the geometry and light you would use to design a level
Underrated comment 😂
Did you notice? He touched his nose.
🐽
What does it mean holistic approach ?
You would do well to deeply research the phrase "Everything flows". The philosophy behind this saying will lead you down The Obscure yet enlightened paths, and eventually to Cybernetics, which is the science of governing dynamics and true underpinning of the methods you espouse...
it means approaching a problem from multiple angles. For instance, you could approach a coding job from a "all I care about is how this game is coded" point of view, while a holistic approach would mandate considering how your work will effect gameplay, art, animation, etc.
All tips he gives just seem to be from the first Dishonored, it's hard to tell what is his personal contribution to the design philosophy or if he just applied the formula made up in the first one...
This focus on intentionality makes clear to me why I didn't care for the Dishonored games.
How come? Was it because you prefer clear steps while going through a game? Like, wanting to escape from thinking hard about anything for a bit? Or was the game confusing, like it always felt like you didn't know where to go next?
@@peterlantz7966 what? No. Because it becomes a game of what did the designer think the player wanted to do in this situation in which thinking about systems interactions and how to use them is replaced with you looking for the design breadcrumbs for strategy a or strategy b. It's a recursive, high minded approach that ignores its recursion and mistakes a player recognizing that they're being given discrete options as far more agency than it actually is.
@@elcidbob I think I see what you mean now. So its like... It would be more fun to spill the legos on the floor and let players go crazy with how they connect, as opposed to giving them part of a finished model to complete? I think? Whether I get it or not, thank you for replying!
@@peterlantz7966 exactly, the focus on intentionally from the designer standpoint results in obscured gameplay, not emergent. It is admittedly a bit of a tenuous distinction because outside of some kind of randomizer, a designer can't fully divorce themselves from how players may go through a section, but there's a difference between having a variety of gameplay elements present and selecting a variety of gameplay elements so that a player can think their way through a situation before committing to action. The latter more strongly reinforces functional fixedness through the visual language the designer uses to breadcrumb the solutions that they've pieced out.
And to be clear, I'm not saying any of this is bad, just more it's not my cup of tea because it feels a bit patronizing and unsatisfying because after a bit, you realize you're not doing something new and clever but just doing exactly what the devs intended.
@@elcidbob interesting take!
I cant see this video, that dude touching his nose every fucking second. but lecture's good
I watched it in 1.25 speed, his start-stop, pace made me feel sleepy.
troller
lol
you are correct my fellow British citizen
Can confirm that the guy is a robot.
A robot confirms that a robot confirms that the robot is indeed to be a robot.
Did he do a line of coke before the talk
Or like
Inhale a bottle of hot sauce
I was a bit nervous about managing to say everything I wanted to say, and I did a line of coke
@@stevelee_gamedev that's based
I hope next time they dont put a cute girl next to the speaker so i dont have to watch the speech twice cause at first i was just kind of staring at her all the time and not really listening.......................
What the hell does hololistic mean? Does he mean holistic?
what a bunch of kraap
lessons from dishonored 2 .... dont be dishonored 2
Yeah, great game with great level design? I would say plenty of games can learn a ton from Dishonored
what are you talking about? dishonored 2 is a very solid game
The only thing questionable about the game was with how it just... ended. No really meaningful epilogue.
Level design was pretty fucking sweet though.
Daveyo89 Maybe on the consoles. I am on PC and I want my money back. I literally cannot finish the game because of where I am at doesn't render above 7 fps. I have 2 EVGA 1070's and this game is an unoptimized POS if I still can't play it to this day. To be fair I have heard from console players it was an enjoyable game...if you can finish it.
I have 970 TI and only 8 GB ram i5 chip and it runs great, its fixed
Couldn't get past the first ten minutes...sounds like the guy is actively trying to innovate the dead, empty sandbox full of locked doors and pretty pretty oh so pretty NON INTERACTIVE torches and candelabras and paintings of concept art in NPCs f*cking houses. He is an eater of worlds and a creator of none. This has put me off Dishonored, which is a real waste but after a game like BotW, where practically every object and surface is interactive; Listening to this mug tripping over his own presentation on how to make Cutting Corners a staple of the Industry, is just such a huge bummer.
@@stevelee_gamedev Don't mind him. You did a really good job :) I enjoyed the talk and learned a lot of valuable information.
Thanks
I agree that a lot of games have many non-interactive elements, but I wouldn't say thats a BAD thing in of itself. Taking away options allows the game to focus on stuff that is fun for that particular game. Even BOTW has its own set of non-interactive elements if you think about it. Its about setting the stage for the type of challenges the game is all about. Some stuff is extra/distracting, some stuff is actually interesting.
25:30 world building
17:49 4 parts of intentionality
18:19 how to facilitate intentionality
19:30 Clint hocking ooda loop forest dowling nils Andersen
35:00 interactive narrative
was anyone else really disturbed by the "good guy" option for taking him out was permanently retarding him?
That's a recurring flaw in the Dishonored series: the binary moral system more often than not weirdly presents the most disturbing choices as the righteous or low chaos ones.
@@15awesomehighfive This is on purpose. None of the non-lethal solutions to dealing with targets in the Dishonored games are presented as "righteous". They're deliberately designed to be dark - a fate worse than death, often with a sense of irony or poetic justice - to add some interesting complexity to their morality
None of the non-lethal solutions to dealing with targets in the Dishonored games are presented as "good guy options". They're deliberately designed to be dark - a fate worse than death, often with a sense of irony or poetic justice