It's coming up because your sig links to it.Originally Posted by bm4n
-
-
heres why i think there is levels.
(1) so the maps can run smoothly, only running one section of an area at a time.
(2)because theres always a new goal, and at the end of a level it's a good time to save and take a break. -
What's wrong with levels? This is the most idiotic thing I've ever heard.
Half-Life 2 doesn't have levels. It's paced exactly like Half-Life 1, the only difference is it lets you load different sections of the game at any time. Also, games that don't have levels still have loading times between areas.
Games that don't have levels are usually built completely different from games that do. Most shooters that have dramatic pauses between levels don't have seemless continuity between loading times, or they just have different pacing altogether. Being modern also doesn't make games more level-free. The Legend of Zelda games were all about roaming about the land, and though they contained dungeons, they never contained levels. -
Pointless when viewed within the context of the game.
They either work or they don't.
They are neither anathema nor benediction.
and it frakken time this is wiped from the face of these forums: -
What the **** is the point of even discussing this ****ing subject? Levels are as natural to games as the game-play itself.
I can already predict a new topic on this forum;
WHY DOES GAMES STILL HAVE GRAPHICS???
Or if you'd like;
WHY PLAY GAMES WHEN YOU CAN WATCH MOVIES?? -
Yeah good point... Why interrupt a perfectly logical discussion with angry posts, when you can, not. Originally Posted by The Virus
-
Hey, im very new here but have collecting games for a while now. I thought this topic was interesting so i thought i I would add a bit.
Obviously there are a few factors on why levels exitst in games (memory restrictions on older consoles being a major one) I believe one reason is that your brain just needs time to adjust and is also conditioned to be rewarded after completing a level, thus you want to play the game's next level, and the level after that.....just like bm4n said "Cuz levels are fun...Sometimes you need to break up the action"
I guess its very similiar to books, or albums. Would you enjor reading a book that has no chapters? Or an album that has no titles or gaps between songs? Personally i listen to alot of ambient music which quite often is mixed seamless and find it to be a different audio experience than when you are just clicking to the next song or whatever...with no gaps (and typically no words) you brain must latch on to the ideas in a different way. Games are no different than this. I think it really comes down to what you feel like at that moment....do i want to play "Arkanoid" or "Seaman"? -
There are cool games that are not level-based, but I think it is stupid to discuss whether it is better or not. Game concepts vary alot, and thank Jesus Crust for that!
-
Honestly this topic is stupid, as has been said by other people some games really need levels and others dont, but all require loading time, by the way level less games are even older than the oldest game mentioned (Elite i think), old text/graphical adventure games were one level, just different areas.
Nitrous -
over 100 years ago airplanes was relased with wings... we have now a XXI century so why airplanes still have wings
a peoples living on the world from many centuries, why peoples (usualy)
have one head two arms and two legs?
--------------------------------------
1 LEVELS are good and naturals for many types of games
like a chapters for books.
2 loading screens and waiting for loading a new levels are not good :>
some times ago a game on Amiga (i was forgot about this game name) has a unique system: when you are on stage a next stage is loaded so player dont wait for loading because before player change stage a next one is loaded and waiting in memory.
sorry for my english
