Archive: 36 posts

---

I really dislike the fact that you cant resize things like the scoreboard and checkpoints anymore. They do not fit any grid. It causes my psychological dysfunctions to twitch. I think there needs to be a change to this if i am to maintain any form of sanity during creation.

2010-11-09 17:38:00 Author: Deftmute Posts: 730

---

I totally agree!! i wish they would have left in the emitter resize glitch at least for some object like checkpoints, im surprised that the creators Mm have on board to make story levels and DLC havent argued our case, even if they arent allowed to use this kind of "cheating". Also i noticed that in the marvel pack one level actually used th BG glitch to make it look like cars were moving :O

2010-11-09 18:11:00 Author: Skalio- Posts: 920

---

Personally, I dislike resized checkpoints and scoreboards. To solve the grid problem you can glue the checkpoint onto an invisible piece of grid-sized hologram and capture that.

2010-11-09 18:34:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

Yeah i agree about scoreboards definitely, but sometimes it is hard to incorporate a large checkpoint into a level and keep the visuials nice, in these situations i would use resize glitch, also in lbp1 they were very useful for teleporting systems particularly in rpgs

2010-11-09 18:37:00 Author: Skalio- Posts: 920

---

IMHO, visual appeal isn't everything, but usability is. But everyone's free to their own opinion. There is a deathless method of teleportation in LBP2, using forced-entry long-range controlinators.

2010-11-09 18:42:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

I never liked resized scoreboards, but I liked the checkpoints. Sometimes you just needed to squeeze a checkpoint into a small space or hide it from the player or whatever. In one of my first levels, I needed to stick a checkpoint inside the small elevator I built but it wouldn't fit so I had to shrink it. Instead of complaining, though, you should make yourself some resized checkpoints/scoreboards in lbp and keep 'em in your popit for transfer to lbp2. I keep a tiny checkpoint and a tiny tethered jetpack in my popit (though I don't know what I'd need a tiny jetpack for any more).

2010-11-09 20:27:00 Author: Sehven Posts: 2188

---

Invisible checkpoints, they're even worse! (though I don't know what I'd need a tiny jetpack for any more). But it's so cute! Keep it for the tiny sackbots!

2010-11-09 20:31:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

i do have some saved in my lbp1 profile... i thoughtlessly deleted them cleaning up when i got started in the beta

2010-11-10 14:35:00 Author: Deftmute Posts: 730

---

if you still need Little life gates etc, just make them on LBP1 still and use the take object from LBP1 to LBP2 button, And Yohoho at people who dislike the littie ones... Why does it bug you? depending on what you need them for sometimes you just bloody need little ones like it looked perfect in my old Godzilla level i had where everything was little because you were made out to be the same size as godzilla as you battled him, plus i think they can look if its done right very artsy in other sizes, *mew

2010-11-10 14:53:00 Author: Lord-Dreamerz Posts: 4261

---

I dislike them because they are my safe zones, and I want to be able to recognize them instantly. Familiarity, a cornerstone of good usability. P.S. Contrary to what you might think, I'm not actually a purist User Interface designer.

2010-11-10 16:49:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

Invisible checkpoints, they're even worse! But it's so cute! Keep it for the tiny sackbots! IF they could use Jetpacks.... (Which they can't.)

2010-11-10 18:14:00 Author: Silverleon Posts: 6707

---

Doh! They might still in the final version, or a later Creator Pack.

2010-11-10 20:33:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

Safe zone?? i don't get it... stuff kills you just fine while your in front of 1 =P plus you don't need to know where they are anymore as we just wire them up to turn on when needed anymore *mew

2010-11-11 06:42:00 Author: Lord-Dreamerz Posts: 4261

---

daww no more emmitter glitch? oh well im going to make grid sized checkpoints tomorrow then.

2010-11-11 06:59:00 Author: TheAffected Posts: 626

---

Also i noticed that in the marvel pack one level actually used th BG glitch to make it look like cars were moving :O They did not use the BG glitch in the Marvel pack. The layers in the background are on the back regular layer, and are set to move slower than the foreground objects, making them appear further away. I have used this technique myself.

2010-11-11 08:58:00 Author: thor Posts: 388

---

Safe zone?? i don't get it... stuff kills you just fine while your in front of 1 =P By safe I mean I can relax a bit at that point because if I die, I don't lose any progress.

2010-11-11 08:58:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

Rogar, you're aware that the LBP community is completely uncomfortable with the concepts of usability and HCI and why they are fundamentals of game design, right? I pretty much gave up on that one months ago.

2010-11-11 10:19:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

If there's even just one soul I can reach, it'll be worth it.

2010-11-11 11:30:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

By safe I mean I can relax a bit at that point because if I die, I don't lose any progress. that just comes down to level design, it being normal size don't mean you can relax, i used to do mean stuff all the time with life gates, like after you pop out of it i set logic to kill the gate, or i'd drop a block of Gas so you'd die as soon as you poped out =P see? size means nothing by it self, xD but really it all comes down to all of us will design are levels anyway we want, you do know trying to change someone's opinion is like almost impossible? x3 *mew

2010-11-12 10:25:00 Author: Lord-Dreamerz Posts: 4261

---

Also i noticed that in the marvel pack one level actually used th BG glitch to make it look like cars were moving :O They did not use the BG glitch in the Marvel pack. The layers in the background are on the back regular layer, and are set to move slower than the foreground objects, making them appear further away. I have used this technique myself. It's a technique developed in the animation industry, and this is probably the only other instance it can actually be applied. It's called multiplaning, and I've also used it to good effect on a few unpublished levels of my own, except mine works on a "follower" rig in LBP rather than emitters. As for the OP, I agree. Small checkpoints are especially useful. I've got several levels where they are needed to respawn the player back into a vehicle on death. Tiny scoreboards... also useful but not as necessary IMHO. I'm really surprised at this being removed based on the fact that we have tiny sackbots alone. If we want to sell the illusion of the player not controlling a sackbot then these items seem like a necessary evil if you ask me.

2010-11-12 12:31:00 Author: Rustbukkit Posts: 1737

---

Rogar, you're aware that the LBP community is completely uncomfortable with the concepts of usability and HCI and why they are fundamentals of game design, right? I pretty much gave up on that one months ago. I guess i missed the part where making my scoreboard 3x3 big squares made it stop working.

2010-11-12 15:42:00 Author: Deftmute Posts: 730

---

I guess i missed the part where making my scoreboard 3x3 big squares made it stop working. And I clearly missed the part where that was relevant to usability. If anything, I think you've neatly underscored the point I was making

2010-11-12 15:53:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

I'd say as long as the scoreboard can be read and causes the level to be completed, its quite usable. (it works) and both of those can be made irrelevant. do the players need to know what rank they have on a level where everyone has the same score? the possibility of some people using it in ways that really do not work is not a reason to remove the option. if i'm not mistaken, there's a level on the GOTY that uses a small scoreboard at the end. unless you're using some other definition of usability that i'm not aware of. if that's the case, i guess you got me.

2010-11-12 16:38:00 Author: Deftmute Posts: 730

---

(it works) That's not what "usability" is - not in the technical sense. HCI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human%E2%80%93computer_interaction) and usability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usability) are (in very simple terms) the studies of how humans react to systems and are relatively complex fields that need to take into account a whole range of factors, but overall deal with the cognitive aspects of psychology. Sadly, it often gets trampled all over by artists working in interactive media, because they have come from a background where their art is something that is delivered to a completely passive audience, so there is no reason to be constrained within the need to facilitate interaction, which has always been an issue with web-based media, where many web designers don't have a proper understanding of the psychology involved. This has massively improved from about 10 years ago in fairness and the majority of web designers do have a basic understanding of usability and that, surprisingly enough, function is every bit as important as form. Which isn't really meant to be a dig at artists - but I can't help it. When I was involved in web design several years ago I regularly had to deal with artists who flat out refused to accept that the ease with which their users could interact with a navigation system was important - it was pretty, therefore it was good. How does this relate to checkpoints... Well, the checkpoint in a video game serves a vast number of purposes. It's a respwan point yes, but it's also a indicator of goal - if there is a checkpoint there that's a direction you should be heading in. It provides a feeling of safety, when you reach the checkpoint you can relax as any mistakes will cost you little... along with a number of other psychological hints that it provides to the player. Hiding them, removing them or otherwise interfering with the presentation of respawn to the player, especially in a linear progression level might look "prettier", but that misses a whole spectrum of subliminal psychology that is fundamentally ingrained in most gamers. Now you may say that many games don't have obvious checkpoints.... But they do. Simple example, Uncharted - it's a continuous progression and there is no clear, identifiable marker that gives a continue point... however each and every continue point is well defined in the flow and the structure of the game, and within about half an hour you subconsciously know when a continue point has been passed, even if you don't know you know. If you're looking for it, you can identify each continue point as you reach it, without there being any explicit symbolic representation. Which comes down to the system being well designed and teaching you it's rules. In LBP, teaching the player your rules for something like respawn points is made exceptionally difficult, due to the shortness of the levels. If you replace the checkpoint with something very explicit and stick to that religiously, you can get away with it, but removing, obfuscating or generally presenting checkpoints in a inconsistent manner, which is all to common in LBP, undermines one of the fundamental ways in which the game communicates with the audience. Saying "the respawn still works" misses so much of the subtlety of what the respawn represents that the mind just boggles. It's like saying: A stickman scribbled on a napkin looks like the Mona Lisa - you can recognise both as people, so what's the difference? That said, being able to resize checkpoints would be a good thing, especially to be able to grid align them - at the end of the day it falls into that category of features that can be heavily abused, but the fact that people will use them to implement bad design is no reason to not allow the feature. This is more an overview of the concepts that surround the issue of hiding checkpoints for the sake of art, or convenience of the creator and how that can impact the subtleties of interaction with the audience. And yes, I analyse videogames, deal with it

2010-11-12 22:40:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

Thanks, rtm223. I glad that there are people who care about this kind of thing, too. I thought I was wasting time analyzing video games. Looks like I'm not crazy after all.

2010-11-13 00:28:00 Author: Stoicrow Posts: 276

---

Wait, there is a glitch to resize checkpoints? LOL. That would have been usefull oh, I don't know, a year ago. I need to pay more attention.

2010-11-13 00:52:00 Author: Biv Posts: 734

---

Well, Rtm said it all, really. Especially the part about the short levels is important. In this respect LBP levels are more like websites than games. People visit tons of them, and they shouldn't be required to relearn the rules every time.

2010-11-13 01:51:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

Blaa its like i said it all comes down to what we all want im not going be forced to use a life gate size because the user feels comfortable with it, should i have used normal size life gates in my you battle godzilla level where everything is small? No that would not look right, you said you are not one of them likes how the game was set up kind of people but your whole talk sounds just like them, reminds me of the 3D layer haters trying to show why 3D was Bad even though its just a opinionnated thing, thing is its like i said, it all comes down to level design, a good artist a truely good one knows how to set things up right so you get the same feelings you need as you call it no matter how they make it, i mean most levels will be useing sackbots anyways, and they can't even use life gates, So wheres your safe zone now Err? its up to the artist at this point to know how to design things right, i mean a lot of great levels used even normal size life gates but hid them like you come out of a pipe. *mew

2010-11-13 07:33:00 Author: Lord-Dreamerz Posts: 4261

---

And herein lies the problem and why I initially told Rogar not to bother trying to pass on this kind of useful information to the LBP community: I'm an artist, I know best. The only purpose of visual aspects is for beauty - I will ignore all other factors. I don't care if all the evidence gathered by countless scientific studies proves the opposite. I'll not open my mind to things outside my experience. As simple as that. And if you had read and attempted to understand my post, you wouldn't have asked the following: i mean most levels will be useing sackbots anyways, and they can't even use life gates, So wheres your safe zone now Err? its up to the artist at this point to know how to design things right, i mean a lot of great levels used even normal size life gates but hid them like you come out of a pipe. *mew All covered by: If you replace the checkpoint with something very explicit and stick to that religiously, you can get away with it, but removing, obfuscating or generally presenting checkpoints in a inconsistent manner, which is all to common in LBP, undermines one of the fundamental ways in which the game communicates with the audience.... That said, being able to resize checkpoints would be a good thing - at the end of the day it falls into that category of features that can be heavily abused, but the fact that people will use them to implement bad design is no reason to not allow the feature. I do get that you don't have a background in the subject matter here, but please have the decency to actually read what is said and attempt to understand it before throwing out an entire field of science with decades (and arguably centuries) of research and quantitative evidence behind it because "you know best" - that's just being straight-up ignorant and disrespectful.

2010-11-13 11:53:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

-_- yeah forget it, clearly i can't know anything or have "a opinion" that i said it was, you say im just trying to be right but im not, its a opinion, but your saying your right hands down, i never said you were wrong and in all honestly i had read everything you said and understand where you where getting at, but that don't mean im going to agree 100% honestly it looks like to me you have had a bad past with artists, pretty sure you even said so, but to flat out say im wrong is a little rude, both sides have there point and thats why we are talking trying to find the middleground, but im sorry if all it look like was me saying you are wrong and im not, as that was not what i was trying to do. *mew But yeah im done, this is only getting worse as it goes, no point in battling over something like this.

2010-11-13 13:15:00 Author: Lord-Dreamerz Posts: 4261

---

-clearly i can't know anything or have "a opinion" Against well-documented scientific evidence? No, I don't think opinion really counts for much there and I should point out that I'm not just stating my opinion, so you can call me rude and make me out to be a troll, but at the end of the day, you may as well be asking me to respect the opinion that "gravity doesn't exist" - sure you can have that opinion if you like, but I'll stick with the science on that one. It's with this in mind I can comfortable say, without opinion, that statements like "an artist knows" are complete trash. Designers of the systems in question rarely have the ability to actually appreciate how the system is perceived - it's very much a "can't see the wood for the trees" scenario, which is not a criticism of any designers or their abilities. It's another fundamental of human psychology as the designer themselves is inherently biassed by familiarity and prior knowledge and as such does not perceive the system in the same manner as the user. Again, this is well documented psychology, with plenty of evidence behind it - it's not my opinion, but I suppose you've got an opinion that trumps that, of course? And yes, there is certainly middle ground, which is actually what I'd strive for in all forms of interactive media - usability purists would have all aesthetic attributes removed from any interactive system, which is as moronic as people who don't accept that usability is a factor at all. I have no specific issue with artists, many of my closest friends (in LBP and IRL) are extremely talented artists and I love them for it. What I have issue with are people who are closed-minded. And this Rogar, is why you're fighting a losing battle and I believe we have more than adequately now come full circle to my original point. Rogar, you're aware that the LBP community is completely uncomfortable with the concepts of usability and HCI and why they are fundamentals of game design, right? I pretty much gave up on that one months ago.

2010-11-13 13:57:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

i'd like to state that the entire reason i started to argue at all was because of that exact blanket statement of contempt. i took offense it then and i take offense to it now.

2010-11-13 14:50:00 Author: Deftmute Posts: 730

---

There was no contempt in there, it's far more born out frustration. It's a general statement about the trends that I see within the community and was directed at no one individual or identifiable demographic. If you choose to identify yourself as someone who fits that description, then that is up to you. I wouldn't say that would be a contemptible thing - the vast majority of people don't have an appreciation of those concepts, in much the same way there are vast areas that I have little understanding of. Similar blanket statements I could have made with no intention of causing offense: The LBP community prefers simplistic fast food levels to well crafted ones. The LBP community doesn't appreciate true art when it sees it. The LBP community struggles with any level that requires you to to think and / or have any kind of gaming skill All blanket statements representing my view of trends in the community. Not applicable to all individuals and certainly not directed to anyone in particular. If anyone takes offence to any of those, then I absolutely do not feel responsible for that. Now, back to the topic at hand. Resizing: It really should be enabled as a standard feature without need for glitchery (and certainly not with need to import from LBP1). BTW, if you do import a checkpoint from LBP1, can you modify the style still, or are you stuck with the default LBP1 style?

2010-11-13 15:52:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

well, all i ever stated was that i wanted the option to resize. addressing Rogar as you did, it seemed (to me at least) that your demographic was "those who are disagreeing with Rogar", which included myself.

2010-11-13 17:07:00 Author: Deftmute Posts: 730

---

My reason for bringing up the usabilty aspect was to highlight the other side of resized checkpoints. Using miniature checkpoints to make the player look bigger I can understand, as long as you consider the consequences. In the end it's the creator that decides what to do with the level. And it's the players that decide if they like it or not.

2010-11-13 18:10:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

people are bound to make bad decisions in any given scenario. If youve played any of my levels, you would probably realize (i hope) that i do take "usability" into account when designing them... to the best of my ability anyways. although one could argue that my camera angles undermine this pursuit.

2010-11-13 18:56:00 Author: Deftmute Posts: 730

Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.