Closed corridors vs Open world. What is better?

Hello, I would like to start this discussion. I am working on this FPS game and would really appreciate some hints on this, what do you think is better to do, closed corridors or open world? I am talking both about procedural generation and manual building of the world.

Which one is easier to make?
Which is easier on performance?

And in matter of Survival FPS game, do you believe that corridors might be a bad idea or it will boring compared to open world.

Those are the major questions but I am open to any other points you might have.

 

Easier on performance : Closed Corridors.
Easier to make : this one really depends on the amount of detail you put in, overall i would say closed corridors.

But really - isnt this obvious?

 

It is, even to me a total beginner. But I wanted to be absolutely sure. I am working on my Dream.
Don't want to leave anything to coincidence. Thank you for your reply.

 

At this point I was thinking "Ooh! A real game-design question we can sink our teeth into!"

...followed rapidly by "Doh!"

 

I edited my original post to avoid these kind of disappointments, I would also like to know if my design has a chance to be played.

 

All designs have a chance to be played, if you post a prototype. You might even get constructive feedback - on this forum, it's a 100% chance.

Which one is easier to make? Mu. Which one is easier for you to make? Do you have a lot of coding experience? Are you strong at 3D art?

Even with that, remember - this is the game design forum. While you have to build it, think of how your player will approach their time in your dream. What do you want them to experience, and - most importantly - why? What are they going to get out of it?

Finally, a resource as far as procedural generation is concerned:

 

Yeah, truth is that I am beginner in everything, 3D art, coding, audio and even design. But I work on myself really hard and doing some progress.

All I want now is someone to discuss my ideas and listen feedback on them. If it is viable or not.

 

if you are completely new, maybe you should take the FPS Template, then replace elements by your own, bit by bit, then examine how code is set up and start making changes step by step....

 

Well, at the moment I am trying to make the multiplayer work. Next up is to start the work on character itself and Inventory system which proves to be the most difficult so far.

I have UFPS assets but I am not sure if I will use it. It's not really made for UNET.

 

Well, the real thing to consider is the design of your game, and what you're trying to achieve. Closed corridors and open-worlds are two different tools, and should be applied differently based on various considerations. It's more of an apples and oranges scenario. One is not better than the other, as both are quite different.

In terms of your initial two questions, I think the answer is obvious. Closed corridors are easier to make, and they are better for performance. Closed corridors are just inherently more limited than open worlds. Their scale is smaller. This makes them easier/faster to construct, and makes for much shorter draw distances, which benefits performance considerably. Again, this doesn't make them better, it simply highlights some of the advantages that they enjoy due to their nature.

 

As a vivid FPS player, I personally dislike closed corridors, otherwise known as fatal funnels. Strafing is ineffective, it becomes impossible to flank enemies, and of course it makes it harder to find cover as the options are really limited. I guess if you're going for something like an original Doom style it would be alright.

 

If you're still new to everything, why are you starting on your "dream" game?

Anyway, short answer: Corridors are easier. Easier to make, easier to design, easier to implement.

 

I don't want a small corridors where you can't really strafe or dodge at all everywhere. And if you can't flank enemy, it's just flat out stupid design. I am not aiming for open wide location, but also not for narrow long corridors.

Yes, I am pretty new to everything. But I work a lot to learn as much as I can. I do it as hobby alongside with work so I don't hesitate to revisit any areas. I did some super small projects and now I am doing my best on this one. If I'll come up with idea on some simple but fun game that is not just copy of already existing one, I'll gladly postpone this project to gain more experiences.

 

Yeah I wound up postponing my "Dream" project to gain experience on a smaller title as well. We gotta learn to walk before we can sprint you know?

 

Yes, I would like to do that as well. But I don't have any idea for smaller project.
Besides I have 2 dream projects in mind, one in smaller closed corridors and one in big open world, so this stupidly huge project is already the easier one

"Aim for the moon and you might hit a star"

 

agreed,
but in your case, just start with the base game mechanics, player, movement, weapon, then the environment will be just a decision to make later.... you can mix open levels and closed spaces at the same time, witch brings some game density... then you decide if you go fully procedural.

 

Yeah, I plan doing something like that, first steps are player and all around him, inventory, server/client, survival elements, movement and weapons (which I am still deciding if keep strictly melee or ranged too). After those parts are ready and "playable" I'll start working on players models, animations and sounds, than the same for items and last for environment.

If I'll get some co workers on the way, I would be really happy. I have everything in my head, and I am eager to share it with the world.

 

you are going for the big game man...
just try to get a player in a basic scene and you will be happy as hell

 

Yeah, I already have prototype working, for both random map generation and player joining and moving around on server.
I did it via some documentation and tutorials.

 

I get this all the time both from other developers and from our community. Open world! That is what you should do..it so cool!

However...while it may be cool, I see the challenges it creates for many of us, especially those of us who do not have a huge team, who are still learning as we go and who want to finish within a realistic time. Here are some of the info I have gathered, mostly from reading or talking to people. I am not the programmer for our game so I may be way off on some of these...but from the perspective of someone who is still learning Unity and the nuts and bolts of actually creating the world, it might be helpful to others in my shoes.

Positives to Open Worlds:
Great PR, players love them, or think they do. Tell them your world is the size of Texas and they get stars in their eyes. Your community will grow.
More realistic, no loading areas, no artificial barriers, just nice seamless game play.

Negatives to Open Worlds:
Lots of world to fill, tons and tons, with grass, trees, and other stuff. That takes time.
Unless you are very good and experienced at optimizing, the size of your world/terrain will affect your performance. Even if you tile and stream, you will still have issues that will require expertise and experience.
Remember, 4-8 textures per terrain tile. If you cut up your terrain, you can probably deal with this, but not easy to make terrain tiles with different textures match. Your fancy "10 different biomes" in your huge world won't be as easy as you think. Same is true of weather, just a bit harder to do and make look good.
In a multiplayer game or MMO, players will spend lots of time running around looking for other players. If interaction is important to them, they may not stick around.
Boring worlds with lots of repeated items and stuff will not make all players happy. Some of those community members with stars in their eyes may give you a review criticizing your boring world.

Positives to Zones or Corridors:
You can spend more time on each zone, make it more detailed and special. It will be more interesting to players.
Optimizing is more straight forward and while still a challenge, is easier to handle. You focus on one area at a time.
No issues with textures since you can easily use different texture sets in different zones. Same is true of weather. Easy to set different weather for each zone.
Players can find each other easily because they won't have to traverse a huge empty world. You can still have wilderness zones but players will know where to find each other.
Much easier to do for those of us without the expertise of a larger studio.

Negatives to Zones or Corridors
Loading times...although you can minimize these or make them interesting. Corridors used creatively could cut down or almost eliminate the player's perception of loading.
World is not as massive....and this I think is subjective.
Not as cool. Some players will balk at this....No seamless huge world? Forget it, back to "insert popular MMO".
Old fashioned, out dated, a sign of an indie game....
I am sure you can add others.

Forgot one...some issues with terrain can be solved by using meshes, such as the textures. BUT you should know how to use a 3d modeling program very well to use complex terrain meshes in a huge terrain.

 

I believe that closed corridors are really underestimated, now that I am sure that they are a way to go for me, I'll try to do them right.

Thing is that it really depends on games theme, but I wanna try and do something differently in multiplayer survival genre.

 

you are cooking a nice dish of chineese noodles yet...
multiplayer + survival + procedural corridors .... i don't understand the taste of what you're doing..
if you plan to generate corridors on the fly, they will be just crap, unless you have a big talented team that can make really neat corridor sections, they are more "rooms" than corridors.
in addition, just making corridors doesn't make the gameplay more interesting than a shooting range.
everytime i had corridors in a FPS they always were a transition from a zone to another or a maze to the player.
you will have to work a LOT on the gameplay to make your game attractive and open levels are easier to design for good fun.
if you think corridors are fine to stick players toghether i'm affraid that will frustrate them.
interesting and really well tought objectives with a really well designed level is what the players will enjoy playing.
English is not my mother language so, i hope i don't sound too harsh, this is no my intention.
before going "survival MMOFPS", i'll just advise you to learn a little more about 3d graphics and coding if you are completely new.
i mean : if you are good at coding, you can hook on a 3d artist to join...
same thing for 3D if you are good, you will find a coder to help you.
but you should be good at something.

but prior to this : design the game first , no one will follow you in ihis project that is by itself foggy dark corridors with no visibility.
really .. if you are a one man team with no real 3D or coding skills, start with a little something to learn, then step further

 

I say..go for it. Do a prototype first, make sure your corridors work. Along the way, start learning a bit about 3d modeling, so at least you can make simple models or modify/retexture ones you purchase.

Also, try learning some coding skills. Udemy has some great classes. Google Udemy, register, then wait a day or so and you will get a coupon to try one of their classes for a deep discount. The ones by 3dMotive are very good. There is even one that teaches you how to make games in Unity with C#. My son had great results and I have gotten thank yous from folks who have tried them based on my recommendation.

You can make your dream game. Just take it one step at a time, as Antislash said above.

You will find plenty of people telling you that you can't do it...but as long as you recognize that it is not going to be as easy as putting a plastic model together, then you will be fine. Just plod along like the rest of us.

 

BTW, no offense to Antislash, but I wish the "you can't do it" stuff would stay out of the design forum. It has nothing to do with design.

This guy asked a question about a design feature in his game and like most threads where a new person posts, it always turns into a "crush your soul before you try" sort of thing. Not that Antislash meant to do that, but left alone, this post will be full of the naysayers and doomsday predictions.

I would appreciate it if the mods would please push folks to stay within the confines of design not only in the topics but also in the posts.

This should trigger some interesting discussions on zone/corridor vs open world. I for one was hoping it would.

 

...But...crushing souls is so fun!

In all fairness, it did start as a "how do I build...?" question instead of a "what do I build...?" question, which is probably cause for some of the snarkery - it's poor justification for being a douche to the OP, but even I had to work to reply with a straight face above; the question(s) smacked of someone who wasn't quite ready to embark on the dream project.

Completing small projects doesn't mean you're ready to build your dream - unfortunately, a fact I'm all too familiar with. Sometimes, you need to keep building small projects. Everyone walks a different path, and the OP needs to find theirs. This is part of that journey.

Granted, it was then redirected to being a "what do I build...?", which is good - the fact that the OP recognized that is a very good sign for his ability to complete their dream game. How you present yourself to others does matter, and not just for the benefit of others.

I suggest to the OP to reduce the scope of what they're trying to build. A multiplayer game where you have diminishing resources and need to find new ones is a good place to start. Then, add the FPS aspect to the game. Then, other stuff. While the zeal for making the dream project is more than admirable, it's going to bog you down and kill your dream game before it gets to the point where you know if it's going to be a thing in earnest, or not.

 

Ok. First of all, nobody crushed my dreams Don't worry about that. I put a lot of time into designing this game of mine and I also took the time to divided into smaller modules so I don't aim to do a AAA game from the start but little by little, step by step.

In case anybody is curious or wanna hear a bit more about my design, leave me a message, I would gladly hear an opinion on my ideas.

 

Sounds good, Hallker. I highly recommend smaller modules. That is how we are making our game as well and it helps.

And Asvarduil, you just proved my point...although I guess it was my fault for posting what I did in the first place. lol

 

This time I didn't crush a single dream. Sadly, Sword Art Online MMORPGs are out of fashion, or I'd be all over that. Ditto for Slenderman.

 

It's a little late, but probably worth pointing out that "open world" and "discrete levels" aren't antonyms. Hell, they aren't even related. "Open world" is about progression and not about having one gigantically crappy level with a boatload of performance issues. The only reason open world is even a part of level design is because it implies a large number of interconnections.

Whether levels should be tight and claustrophobic or wide and expansive is a totally different issue with the right answer usually being both.

 

I did not know that, Rocko, but thank you for sharing that information. I guess rather than open world it should be Streaming or Seamless?

Would those be more appropriate?

 

Maybe, but those just mean that there isn't a loading screen. Given load times for console these days, every game is trying to be seamless to the best of their ability. It's mostly an issue of how you divide the game world up, and part of the problem is what defines a level is amorphous.

 

oops guys, you didn't get my point, maybe due to my bad English...
as i approved hallker words : "Aim for the moon and you might hit a star"
i'm not trying to crush any dream, i DO have my own and i take the half of other's advise.
no no i just say "go for it !".

Hallker said he is new to 3d and coding and, in that case, if he wants to make a rewarding progression and not be puzzled at some point, the best option is to begin brick by brick.... have a player playing well on a crap level, then improving the level or implementing some kind of prodedural level creation. then survival gameplay , then base building if he wants, then multiplayer.... but trying to make all the things at a time... sounds tedious

at some point the original question "corridors vs open world" implies another question : can it be done by a one man team in a reasonable timelapse with reasonable difficulties.

i'd be glad to see the OP progresses on that !

 

In the context of the original post, I think Hallker was asking about architecture: close corridors versus open outdoor expanses. (I'm using "architecture" loosely to mean the environment models you place in the environment.)

You could argue "open world" originally referred to outdoor architecture. They're harder to optimize since the viewing area is much farther. I think Hallker's original post has valid design considerations. If you know you need to sustain a certain framerate, you might design your game in an enclosed space station rather than a wide open alien planet.

You can stream pieces of any environment. It doesn't matter if it's close corridors or open outdoor expanses. Or you can load them in discrete levels. When you hit a zone edge in Everquest, the game would pause and load a new zone, even outdoors.

"Open world" has become associated with sandbox environments, in which your options and the order you choose to do things is wide open. But if sandbox just means you get to choose what you do and in what order, you can have a sandbox in closed corridor architecture, too.

So you can mix and match any of these:

• Close corridors vs. open expanses (architecture)
• + Streaming zones vs. discretely-loaded zones with loading screens (scene management)
  
• + Sandbox activity vs. linear scripted activity (gameplay style)

Anyway, @Hallker - I recommend starting with a close corridor game + loading screens + scripted activity. It's the fastest path to a playable game. Close corridors are usually easier to sustain good framerates and set up for procedural generation. Loading screens are easier to implement than streaming zones in and out. Scripted activity lets you test basic interaction in a more controlled environment.

Plus, a survival game in tight spaces sounds novel. It's different from wide open, empty forests and wastelands.

You can always add to it later. Good luck!

 

Corridors will always be simpler, trying to mix outdoor with indoor is VERY difficult and just outdoors is still pretty bad. In closed off environments GI will be more effective, performance will be better (OC) and lack of rendering shed loads of foliage helps a lot.

It's a skill within itself trying to balance everything out, you can but it's not for people new to games.

 

You hit the spot, that was my original question, open environment vs closed one. I plan on creating a survival sandbox game but instead of huge open spaces and long range weaponry I plan on to do it in some kind of space base or underground research facility with low range or melee weapons only.

Thank you for your post.

 

ok sorry i understood "open world" as open world (and didn't see the original post changed)

hallker, did you play Metro Last Light ? the game is mostly in indoor zones and it's a a good example

 

Yes, that is a good example, haven't played it but watched a lot of videos.

I wanna achieve something like that because I believe that it can have much greater atmosphere than other survival games.

And yes, I know, it's not gonna be easy, but whatever, harder the task, better the experience, besides I want to have much more different things than an environment, I was just curious about development time and performance.

 

go get it ! , you won't be disapointed. great atmosphere, really amazing detail work, post_apo survival world, underground.
the use they make of corridors, rooms, sewers, mazes, underground railways and water spaces it awesome, never boring, always taking.
as i stated before, my point is that what will make it amazing is the game design, not the technique you will implement.
you will also see that using only indoors other than repetitive corridors will need almost the same amount of art work needed for outdoors.

 

Yeah, I am aware that for really breath taking scenery I need a either a really world builder that will manually create it or a team of procedural oriented coders.

I know that repetitive environment is not really a way to go. But I believe that I will be able to deliver a nice but really complex system for building a base.

It kind of works for my prototype but I need to fix some more complex issues. But basic idea is that Server picks randomly a seed, than it start with a big layout like, here will be a military department, here a medical one etc etc, when the basic layout is done, a room count begins, map should be around 100 rooms for example, it shuffles from pool of rooms to get a nice combination that can be connected with corridors, hallways etc, than a single room setup begins, every room has it's purpose based on department and available slots, this is also pulled from pool of prefabs.

In this way I can end up with pretty nice map that is quite complex yet really realistic and makes sense. Still this will be really different on every server. This is music of future, for now I work on player itself.

I really deeply thought about everything. I know how difficult this will be tho...

 

post WIP, it can be inspirationnal.

 

Once I have a bit more functional prototype I will. At the moment I am proud that in my map is not everything in 90 degree and that it can build a rooms and whole maps in simplest way

Now my priority number one, two, three is multiplayer mechanic and player systems as inventory which proves to be biggest challenge so far.

 

Well...I missed that one, huh? LOL

Maybe the mod should move my post to a different thread.

Sorry, Halker. Making beautiful environments is my favorite thing to do but it does take time. You are on the right track for your game.