Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

Randy Smith's "valence theory"


Radiatoryang

Recommended Posts

In 2006, Randy Smith presented a framework for making Thief levels. He didn't have a snappy name for it though, so I've re-branded it as "valence theory" and I've posted a summary of his presentation, as well as my personal additions to the theory.

 

http://www.blog.radi...t-or-randy.html

 

As active players or developers of a first person stealth game, I would appreciate your comments / thoughts.

 

.. also: hey, whaddup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting read, like your posts usually are. Because I was asked for it, I'll supply some thoughts. All the thoughts herein are mine own so feel free and encouraged to disagree. :laugh:

 

On definition of success and failure:

For action games the 'success' is defined as 'full health.' And 'failure' is defined as 'dead.'

For stealth games the 'success' is defined as 'guard oblivious.' And 'failure' is defined as 'guards caught you.'

And then the partial margin is shown.

 

I kinda disagree.

 

For stealth gaming getting discovered or caught is not terminal failure like death in action games. To make things comparable, the failure should be death in the sneaking game as well. Thus, getting discovered would still be included in the partial failure margin. The player has to deal with the consequences of being discovered and that makes things even more interesting. It is like this possibility was completely omitted.

 

Being discovered should still be in the partial success/failure margin. This of course is assuming, the mission does not auto-fail if the player is discovered, which is possible, but rather strict objective which is seldom used.

 

--

 

Good point: give the player a dark vantage point to scout the space ahead. Never force the player to run into a well-lit area where he cannot see what is waiting for him. I'll remember that.

 

--

 

On zero-failure path

It is suggested that the mapper always provides and communicates a zero-failure path. I am uncertain about the exact definition of this, but the diagram makes it look like a path-in-shadow, which the player can just waltz everywhere. If so, I disagree totally. In my uneducated (I've no formal training in game level design) opinion, the mapper should think about areas of different security:

  • Low security areas can have these shadow-paths and big areas of total darkness. These are the areas the player flees to if he gets caught. If the mapper adds even one dark climbable hiding spot or a hiding hole, the player is guaranteed a safe hiding area. The player should feel safe in these areas: low amount of guards, silent materials.
  • Medium security areas have more light. They could be described as islands of darkness in a sea of light. A few guards. The player should be on his toes in these areas and he moves quickly from shadow to shadow when the guard looks the other way.
  • High security areas are well lit and always require clever use of equipment if the player wants to make a silent approach. Lots of light and a few guards. Or light as in the medium security, but more guards. Possibly guards with torches. Most of the TDM missions we have can be successfully sneaked without any use of equipment, which is strange. In a high security area, the author should promote clever usage of equipment, which is more important that making the missions 'ghostable.'

The mapper then gives the player the possibility to move through areas as he pleases. Most likely the player stays away from the high security areas and favours the low/medium areas. In a well designed map, the player can avoid totally a few high security locations by sidestepping them via a few medium/low areas. But there should be at least one high security location in a single mission the player must overcome to gain success. Everything here requires the player has a map with information what kind of locations are where! Without a map, the player cannot make intelligent decisions where to go. I'm not saying that the mapper should mark areas like 'high security,' but -like you say in you post- there should be identifiable 'low' security areas: servant's quarter, toilets, etc..

 

Therefore it is rather surprising how low amount of our current TDM missions provide a map of the surroundings. The starting premise is often: "You go to this location you do not know and you should explore and find something." If a real thief would start such a mission, of course he would obtain a map of the location beforehand!

 

--

 

I agree with you with doors: they are beneficial to the player as they cut long view distances. Behind closed doors the player can do whatever they like (even noisy things), but with the risk of a guard suddenly coming in. Even then there is a brief grace period to hide.

 

--

 

In conclusion:

1) "Provide and communicate a zero failure path." Or at least trick the player into thinking there's part of a zero-failure path somewhere, so that they'll commit to some sort of plan.

 

2) "Use level design to stabilize failing players." We like tension, but we don't want to release tension / interrupt flow when we kill the player. Here, death is not transcendence, but a colossal interruption to the stealth aesthetic. This isn't VVVVVV, as handsome and witty as Mr. Cavanagh is.

 

3) "Insta-fail stealth is poor design" because you're basically zero-ing out that tasty "in-between" player state that action games love so much.

 

In my mind translates to:

1) "Give the player means to make decisions where to go and spot likely easy ways in. Allow free decision where to go."

 

2) "Use equipment to stabilize failing players. Also be sure to include a few locations in which clever equipment use is necessary even for the veterans." Gaming is about making decisions. When the player makes the right decision, he gets success. FMA's often forget to give the players to examine a location and deciding to use equipment to make stealthy progress. Level geometry should also help by giving a few guaranteed hiding spots to use if the player gets spotted. But equipment use should be more emphasized.

 

3) "Insta-fail stealth is poor design"

 

--

 

Oh, and finally I find the term 'valence' a bit.. well, not suiting this topic.

The use of concepts like "stealth element" would be more descriptive and would not even need special definition. The concept tells everything.

 

If you go on about 'valences', people like me, are bound to to wonder what the topic has to do about chemical bonding. ;)

 

Never define an obscure term for something, which you could describe with a simple understandable term. "In this treatise on cats and dogs I will use the term 'Schrödinger's box fiend' for a cat and 'photon diffracting barking critter' for dogs."

Clipper

-The mapper's best friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing to do with the topic of this thread, but @Radiatoryang: are you the same Robert Yang who wrote Grinding the dating scene? I enjoyed that article, it seems a very good analysis of why those sites are so useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OrbWeaver: Yeah, I'm that same person, though now I disagree with everything in that article... online dating is just a search engine / private message system, NOT even a game system, and certainly not representative of any form of actual dating. Heh.

 

Sotha: a "zero-failure path" is simply one that prevents the player from getting detected. It can go across metal plates, it can traverse bright areas, etc. It doesn't have to be safe by any means, just possible to execute without getting caught. And certainly equipment stabilizes players, but I think that's a well-explored idea. The idea that a level layout itself can stabilize players, though, I think is less familiar to people.

 

I still side with Randy Smith on the success / failure definitions. Health is much less important in stealth games. 99% of the time you're not in any danger of losing health. I think it's necessary in Thief only to emphasize how vulnerable you are, and to give you semi-permanent feedback that you're not doing very well at sneaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sotha: a "zero-failure path" is simply one that prevents the player from getting detected. It can go across metal plates, it can traverse bright areas, etc. It doesn't have to be safe by any means, just possible to execute without getting caught.

 

Okay, thanks for the clarification. Zero-failure path means 'the obviously safest route in.' A sort of energy minimum path to success. ;)

 

 

The idea that a level layout itself can stabilize players, though, I think is less familiar to people.

 

Err? I thought that the level is obviously the most stabilizing thing. Even in the most simplest run-and-gun -shooting games you use your environment for cover and you seek vantage points high above where your rocket launcher damage is hard to avoid due to the trajectory. Regardless of the game genre, the players do actively and knowingly use terrain to their advantage.

 

I still side with Randy Smith on the success / failure definitions. Health is much less important in stealth games. 99% of the time you're not in any danger of losing health. I think it's necessary in Thief only to emphasize how vulnerable you are, and to give you semi-permanent feedback that you're not doing very well at sneaking.

 

Of course, but aren't you at all bothered by the comparison mismatch? Death is death both in a shooter and in a sneaking game. The end: restart, restore, quit. Getting caught in a sneaking game is not equal to death.

 

Health is equally important in both a sneaker and in a shooter, it is the fine line between being able to carry on and dying. In a sneaking game, getting caught probably costs health, similarily as fumbling in a shooting game: you get hit, you lose health. As long as you have health, you can still carry on and win.

 

Well, Smith of course knows the topic better than I. It is just this is kind of comparison just confuses a hobbyist layman like me.

Clipper

-The mapper's best friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also thought this was some metaphor for electron orbits, such as build a level from the center out, with pathways that branch out from a central hub, or something.

shadowdark50.gif keep50.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree with, and have used the same ideas for the micro- elements, I don't really think the medium scale can be applied without making spectacles or trying to handhold. For example a run down warehouse is a perfectly good place for high value loot, if it's promoted by the story or a reward for ~choose your own adventure~, both things Thief used well to do this. This breaks the expectation and results in a more novel experience (sure, you don't want too much of this but its an example).

 

I think letting it creep above the placement/npc/path hinting, you start looking a bit too heavily into the ever terrible concept of 'immersion', urgh. You end up positively re-enforcing the mapping between location/reward; which you note as a bad thing and explain correctly.

 

Oh, and a minor comment :

While you define affordances correctly, you seem to only be using the assumption of natural mapping of an object as the result of perceived affordance. Rather just use the idea of natural mapping, unless you're dealing with the actual interactions.

 

(and for the rest of you, go read Donald A. Norman - The Design of Everyday Things :))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serpentine: I agree that my use of affordance could use improvement, but I think "natural" is a problematic word. What is "natural" to a person? Norman wrote a 2010 essay ("Natural User Interfaces Are Not Natural") that I interpret as a "reversal" of his position, it seems like he dislikes the word too or at least how most people understand the word. You should read it and see if you come to the same conclusion.

 

Instead, I'd rather push the idea that levels are functions of culture, not nature. (e.g. if you had never seen a European castle before, you might have a more difficult time playing Thief... same goes for Soviet floorplans and buildings in Stalker.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always disliked that it was named natural mapping, and always through it was more of a 'implicit contemporary socio-cultural association mapping', but at the same time I don't like to stray too far from where people understand things. It actually bugs me quite a bit, so yeah I agree completely :)

 

My mental image of how this all worked in my head has always been one of a weather map, with high and low pressure areas, paths at the fronts and the pressure level as well as 'wind'(needent change the size of an area) showing draw/threat levels. Came from when I was writing my old UO farming bot, needed a better way to find high transversal/low risk paths through varied enemies which arnt really limited to a set range/abilities.

 

Who took geography over accounting? awww yeah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Petike the Taffer  »  DeTeEff

      I've updated the articles for your FMs and your author category at the wiki. Your newer nickname (DeTeEff) now comes first, and the one in parentheses is your older nickname (Fieldmedic). Just to avoid confusing people who played your FMs years ago and remember your older nickname. I've added a wiki article for your latest FM, Who Watches the Watcher?, as part of my current updating efforts. Unless I overlooked something, you have five different FMs so far.
      · 0 replies
    • Petike the Taffer

      I've finally managed to log in to The Dark Mod Wiki. I'm back in the saddle and before the holidays start in full, I'll be adding a few new FM articles and doing other updates. Written in Stone is already done.
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      TDM 15th Anniversary Contest is now active! Please declare your participation: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22413-the-dark-mod-15th-anniversary-contest-entry-thread/
       
      · 0 replies
    • JackFarmer

      @TheUnbeholden
      You cannot receive PMs. Could you please be so kind and check your mailbox if it is full (or maybe you switched off the function)?
      · 1 reply
    • OrbWeaver

      I like the new frob highlight but it would nice if it was less "flickery" while moving over objects (especially barred metal doors).
      · 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...