Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Is it just me or have FPS levels grown way out of hand? Medal of Honor: Rising Sun and GoldenEye: Rogue Agent are good examples. I mean, the levels (especially in RA) can take more than an hour, and that's if you don't die and respawn. The Hong Kong level in RA was such a pain. And in both games there were like 8 levels and each one was wicked long. What happened to the days where FPS levels were smaller but there were many more levels in the game? Like MOH: Frontline had like, 20+ levels but they weren't that long and they were still fun, GoldenEye for N64 was th esame way.

I think game designers are spending way too much time on making levels longer and better looking and it's taking away from the gameplay. I find myself just wanting levels to end instead of enjoying them and I hate that. Who else agrees with me?

I think developers should go Half-Life's route and have one seamless world without level's and just have save points and loading areas.
I'm all for long level's if they have the correct amount of savepoints so that you dont have the problem of dying at the very end and have to do it all over again.

I dunno, I liked Halo 2's one big style that you can keep on playing, the first time I played it beginning to end, and I could barely tell where a new level came on.

I agree. I do owever believe that shooters must not only have huge levels like halo 2. that go on for an hour on hard mode., but they must have more than 15 of theml

Half-Life introduced the seamless world that Halo has.

And Halo improved on it.

then halflife2 perfected it

I actually think Halo took a step back in the level design.

it's not the size of the boat, it's the motion in the ocean

I really appreciate lengthy levels as long as they contain interesting content throughout.. such as the half life 2 levels which seem to have life breathed into every square foot. The halo2 levels were obviously alot better than the first.. but they still felt cold and lifeless at points.. and slightly repetetive, like that area with the slider bridges (im still curious why a multiplayer map doesnt have those slide bridges btw). But yes.. I like lengthy levels as opposed to short. Only if the game sucks so badly will I want the level to end fast

The issue isn't about Goldeneye: Rogue Agents' Level Design - the REAL enigma would be to answer this question: what the hell were you doing playing Goldeneye Rogue Agent in the first place!?

Medal Of Honor and Goldeneye Rogue Agent. Two of the most mundane games ever made. Theye are even almost the same game, only one has Bond, the other has Nazis.

Play the likes of Call Of Duty, Halo, Halo 2, Half-Life 2, heck, pretty much any DECENT FPS game and you'll see there's nothing to worry about.

Medal of Honor: Rising Sun was good because I loved the co-op campaigns and Frontline was cool just because, I dunno. Good music to go along with levels that weren't too long. I was fooled into thinking Rogue Agent was a good game when the multiplayer is way too overrated and the levels are way too freaking long. That's my major complaint: lack of levels but the ones that were there were too long and took away from the experience.

Medal of Honor Allied Assult was awesome. The level design was ok, but the use of scripted events was phenomal. Rising Honor was a joke and beat that game in one night.

I didn't think AA was that good
IMO CoD is much better than MoH

oh yea easily.
But I liked Mohaa's Level design,
but Call Of duty's engine and weapons were FAR superior. I would love to see the Mohaa D-day(one of the best levels in the game) level with the CoD "touch"

I love CoD also and I think it's much better.

But AA came out a year before and half the team of CoD is from AA. But when i first played the game, i thought it was awesome.

true Samas

Individual levels in FPS games haven't worked well since Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. FPS games call for one huge world.

True if the game is about story, atmosphere and character design then the huge world level is definitly the way to go.
If the game is all about shooting and not worrying about story elements than individual levels are good to use. For example, Painkiller, CoD and FPS like that wouldn't work so well if its one huge world.
Half Life, Halo and others would suck if it used individual levels.

Halo is not one big world, nor is half life or half life 2.. they are seperate maps that load up after each checkpoint / cinematic etc. "one big world" is something like a lineage 2 type of massive game where no loading occurs at any point to display the world.

True. In Half-Life they're not levels per say, but just a continuation of Black Mesa. So aside from the loading maps, its one big world.