Portal 2
Working with Portal 2
The Setup
To engage in creating my first level in Portal I first needed to understand the game and it's limitations. I found a wiki dedicated to the editor which helped me figure out short cuts, best practices and to confirm scope of the tool. The tool uses a point & click - drag & drop interface and navigates similar enough to most 3D modelling platforms. Great! The learning curve is small meaning I can focus most of my efforts on the design itself. I decided to played through the first 3-4 chapters of the game to get a better understanding of the gameplay and design. I do plan to play through the game in it's entirety but, at this stage I didn't want to influence my creative process too heavily.
Limitations & Considerations
The first step I took was to test the bounds of the level. Doing this I immediately discovered that the area is limited to a 25x25x25 volume. An important note to consider during block-out.
The shipped editor only allows for limited types of visuals (Basic terrain/surface textures) and a dedicated list of interactable(s) (25 puzzle items, 3 hazards, 2 light sources and 2 surfaces)
The showcase element of the game is the 2-way portal gun - and therefore should be considered purposefully with every build decision.
Certain objects (like rooms) require dedicated "dead" level space (volume) behind them.
Some interactable objects cannot be placed on or near others.
Lights take significantly longer to build (compile) - therefore leaving them to later in the build process allows for faster design iteration.
Visual cues such as wall color & switch signage are common uses for player hints/direction and are likely expected by the player.
Design Start
When playing with the editor and reviewing the dimensions I created an extremely large and tall room. This had me think about Vistas and how I could use them given the volume and tool constraints of the editor. A fun challenge!
Playing further with this concept, I tried lighting variations and landed on a concept of an "office tower" or at least some resemblance to one. This made me think about crawling through the ventilation system of a building. Ultimately through this process I landed on several core design concepts that I hadn't seen used in the original game:
Construct the level utilizing the as much of the vertical bounds limit
Have the level progress from the bottom up (ie; climbing upwards)
Utilize a vent system
Find ways to use Vistas given the constraints
Design Mechanics
As I mentioned previously there are 25 different interactable tools to choose from. In a effort to create an enjoyable, meaningful experience that feels cohesive, I decided to pick a finite number of tools to focus design with. They are:
-Tractor Beams
-Light Bridges
-Platforms
Considering these 3 core mechanics lets plot out some of what makes them special and how they can interact to create interesting puzzles.
Tractor Beams
Generate controlled character movement
Transport inanimate objects
Defies gravity
Player can enter and exit at any point -> interesting decisions
Light Bridge
Creates an on demand platform
Bridges long distances
Acts as a shield
Blocks paths of player/objects - can be used as a gate
Platforms
Player can access areas not originally available to them
Environment changes
Can create hints to players of where to go/destinations
Create more interesting architecture
First pass (whitebox)
In game design I try to follow the rules of 3's and 7's (& sometimes 5's). You can read a small bit about the rule of 7 here. It's the main reason I decided to keep the game to 7 rooms. Referring to Image 10 "Game Beat Design" - in a notebook I mapped out a quick flow chart or "game beat" to better understand the flow of the game and confirm a few things I had noticed in my play tests. After laying it out it became clear that the decision matrix and pacing in sections 1, 2 & 3 needed some work. The pink highlighted lines indicate long travel paths & potential rest periods. This could lead to slow loops early in the game play. Additionally in sections 4 & 5 it is a requirement to utilize path 2b, further introducing interrupted and slow progression.
Whitebox notes
In order to kick off the second iteration of design I created a list of positives and negatives. The intention is to compare the positives with original game design intention while using the negatives as a laundry list of items to resolve in the next design pass.
Overall the level was looking relatively good for this stage. It was playable and I had met a lot of my original design intentions. There were a few glaring negatives I needed to resolve however... I'll summarize of a few of the positives and negatives to give a general sense to the approach.
Positive
Image 12 - shows a portion of the first puzzle sequence. The puzzles are really simple, and dropping the drone into the pit is just fun.
This area also acts as the first Vista. It shows off the "office tower" theme, hints towards the next destination (across the gap) and allows the player to see the exit area and final goal through the glass.
Opportunities
Image 13 - shows path 2b which is required a minimum of 3 times in the level. It's way too long for the purpose it's serving. It even has an alternate decision point along the pathway further confusing and distracting from the game beat intention.
The fix is simple, join to the main room and close off the existing path.
Opportunities (cont.)
The list of negatives included a few simple opportunities. Consider Images 15a & 15b - The intention is to use the laser to activate the tractor beam which enables the player access to the next room in the level. In the "Bad" design choice I didn't consider using the glass room to show off the activation of the tractor beam. While the player would eventually likely figure out what was altered, it's an unnecessary difficulty that takes away from the game beat and goes against the glass room theme. Conversely a small change in position of the laser receptor makes it obvious what was changed and gives the player a sense of instant reward and purpose. "I'm smart AND I know what I need to do next".
In the same context consider images 16a & 16b - Here we're highlighting the vent traversal. It's not necessary to make this overly complicated for the player. It's simple and fun to jump through the vents, and gives the player a small break. With the original poor design choice it's not clear what we want the player to do. In the better design choice simple wall lighting guides the player.
Further to the initial lighting changes, additional lighting is placed down each hallway so when looking at the ceiling the player can identify which direction the next vent leads - meaning they have more intuitive control and decision making when placing their ceiling portal.
Opportunities (cont.)
That brings me to the last major opportunity I want to highlight. Visual design of the main room. The screenshot below is a visual of our first view of the main puzzle room. While it's 100% functional, it's neither exceptionally interesting or intuitive. Adding architectural and lighting interest will help to guide and excite the player.
Completion
The final product.
I've uploaded a play-through of the level. Based on the size and amount of puzzles, it would be impossible to highlight all of paths and nuances throughout the gameplay. I've opted to show the shortest route through demonstrating walk-through playthrough from beginning to end.
If you'd like to try out the map for yourself you can find it here.