Hey, what do you think of a 4v4 map, where you have the option to either play Team Deathmatch, FFA, Capture the Flag, etc..., but you also have the option to access a "Terrain Editor," which lets you get an Arbiter, and pretty much do a RP type thing, and then later get to play stuff on the thing that you just made? Does it sound good?

I did. It is hardly long, and very well thought-out. Aristocrat himself has been a mapper for many years and has much experience, so when he posts something as epic as this, you can bet it will be good and thought provocative. Especially with the title, "What makes a map fun?".

TL;DR: it is worth the read.


No. Rp maps are full of fail due to the complexity of what one is trying to do with something as simple as the SC editor. Anything complex takes time to do - too much time. In fact, RP maps fail hard at the time aspect and are thus only popular among a small minority of people.

It's literally the first item on the list

I blame TiKels.

Yep. If you want to know more about making fun games, look up my topic where I posted that game design book. That book was actually recommended in a DigiPen podcast.

"The Timeless Way of Building" and "Code: the hidden language of computer hardware and software" are two wonderful game design books, and were both recommended by DigiPen faculty.

This is more information than you would ever imagine ever being able to utilize in a starcraft map.

Some small anecdotal statements about making games fun:

• Games require meaningful play in order to be fun.
  
• Meaningful play results from player interaction with the game system in a way that alters or impacts the game system or player experience in a relevant way.
  
• Meaningful play must be experienced; a developer can only create the conditions for meaningful play to arise, not meaningful play itself. With this in mind, you have to experience a game during production to fine tune it. Playtesting is essential, and player feedback is vital. Meaningful play is an emergent property within a game.
  
• Avoid degenerate strategies like the plague. A designer must assume a player will always take the most efficient path once the player is able to do so. Keep this in mind and use it to your advantage. If a player can sit in a certain spot of your map and gain an unfair advantage with no effort at all, then that would be an example of a degenerate strategy, find and remove these!!
  
• Ideally games should be easy to learn and difficult to master. This allows your game to appeal to a broad audience, quickly captures player interest, and holds players for longer amounts of time.
  
• Complexity is not inherently fun.
  
• Don't let the player ever sit still with nothing to do.
  
• The game must always hold the player's attention.
  
• Try to solve multiple game design dilemmas or problems with a single solution, rather than one solution per problem.
  
• Simplicity and clarity of the game from the player's perspective should be strove for.

Additional resources:
http://cecilsunkure.blogspot.com/2010/05/game-design-positive-and-negative.html
http://www.staredit.net/topic/9013/

That's why I love RTSs so much. There's always something to do. If you just sit there in an RTS, you're screwed. Same goes for AoS, for that matter.

Aristo, I'd say you need a table of contents. Epic thread so far tho.

I actually did read the block of text

Edit : I swear someone keeps stealing my quotes i say out-loud to myself working on something 30 hours straight, dam hallucinations =s

Easy to play, impossible to master is the best kind of game...