Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Small 2v2 map called «Alsaleh Factory»
(My fourth try! for «Asymmetric» multiplayer level design)
Modes: TDM, Skirmish

(Note: Some 3D models in the level are premade Unity assets from «POLYGON»)



CS:GO Workshop link:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2153733778
 

 

topdown.thumb.jpg.337c8e476c8504c1607583fd39725f18.jpg

 

1828211765_iso1.thumb.jpg.1349b313e4a9f30f942119d85b0188f4.jpg

 

11.thumb.jpg.db3cb48998761f00869309643971c9bc.jpg

22.thumb.jpg.da673ed39de59376bc638300fbae3d36.jpg

 

 

 

 

See more images here:
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/J9lX0a

 

 

Edited by Amin Montazeri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Amin!  Thank you for sharing another design with us.

 

The section marked as 'Solid Spaces', does that mean that they are completely closed off...inaccessible?

 

This looks like another interesting level from you.  I like the spacing of your combat spaces, and the segregation created by the buildings and cover.  I really like the pipes - can they be walked on?

 

I do have a couple of suggestions, since I'm always trying to think of ways to give play spaces more 'personality' or depth...

Slopes or tiers on the lower levels:

Add gentle changes in elevation, or even completely different elevations connected by stairways on the lower levels.  Your buildings can even have their foundations sitting at different elevations, which allows more variability with entrances and exits in each one.  This ties into my second suggestion...

Buildings of different heights: 

Have the top levels of each building (the playable spaces) be at different elevations.  These don't need to be drastic, as even a 1 unit difference can add some spice to the gameplay, and help drive players towards specific areas of the level (this 'flow' is created naturally in objective gametypes, but can be heavily directed by the designer in deathmatch modes - and often should be to prevent stagnation).  It's possible that you already have some height variability built into this level, and I just can't tell from the pictures, but if not this is something I would definitely keep in mind for future projects.

Also have the visual heights of the buildings (the non-playable parts) be varied.  This can help players enormously with orientation, especially when they're first learning the level.  Sometimes having 1 building (or other landmark) extend far above the others can be really helpful for this reason.  And I see that you've already added some visual variability in this particular level, so this is more of a general comment.  Obviously on a more polished project, you can also use tools like color, lighting, texture, etc. to help with orientation.

 

So basically I'm suggesting that you take your asymmetry even further.  You've incorporated it in a way that is quite good when looked at from an overhead perspective (first picture), and that can be expanded on even more through additional asymmetry on the vertical plane.  Hope that makes sense, and once again great job on continuing to push yourself to improve your design capabilities.  I'm really enjoying seeing your growth as a designer.  :classic_biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, a Chunk said:

The section marked as 'Solid Spaces', does that mean that they are completely closed off...inaccessible?

Yeah, it is. "inaccessible" is the correct word for that!
 

12 minutes ago, a Chunk said:

I really like the pipes - can they be walked on?

If I say yes, I must answer its next question!😁 so they are not walkable for now, because I didn't think about the roofs that accessible from that pipes!

 

26 minutes ago, a Chunk said:

Your buildings can even have their foundations sitting at different elevations, which allows more variability

Yeah, I totally agree with you, Jeff but I focused on the "flanking routes" in this level honestly, so for the future projects, I will definitely consider this suggestion 🙂

 

39 minutes ago, a Chunk said:

and that can be expanded on even more through additional asymmetry on the vertical plane.

Great suggestion! I will think about that on the next map.

 

In the end, I really appreciate this detailed feedback, Jeff🙏🏻
Your comments always helped me to further steps and increase the level of my expectation.

Share this post


Link to post
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.