A Good Videogame Tutorial Level?

Well, I thought that I’d talk briefly about videogame tutorial levels today. This is mostly because, after sinking quite a few hours into “Fallout: New Vegas” (2010), I needed a bit of a break from it and wanted to play something different. So, I decided to take a look at another game I got during the autumn sale on GOG – namely the puzzle/action/3D platformer game “Tomb Raider: Anniversary” (2007).

This seems to be a remake of the original “Tomb Raider” (1996) and, as you might expect, there’s the famous optional “Croft Manor” tutorial level. Partially out of nostalgia and partially because I wasn’t sure if I wanted to start playing the full game yet, I decided to see what they had done with this legendary tutorial level.

And, to my astonishment, it is actually better than the original! In the original 1996 game, it is a fairly traditional tutorial. You walk around the manor house and the main character, Lara Croft, will tell you how to do various things. However, the 2007 remake takes a very different – and arguably better – approach.

Although I’m still playing through it at the time of writing, I’ve seen literally one tutorial message (telling me to use a grappling hook) during the half-hour or so I’ve spent with the level. For the most part, the game just plonks you into a relatively safe environment and lets you work things out on your own – sometimes with subtle contextual clues. It mimics how most players actually learn how to play videogames – through trial and error – and it is brilliant.

And, yes, this attitude of “work it out on your own” also extends to other elements of the level too. For example, you can find a map that helps you to navigate a maze. However, rather than being an “auto-map” or anything like that, it is a traditional-style paper map which you actually have to use in a similar way to real life.

More than that though, there is actual proper gameplay during the tutorial too. Rather than just being an open building which you can explore at your leisure, like in the original 1996 game, Croft Manor is actually a small game in its own right. It contains several interlocking puzzles, which often require you to find and use items found in other parts of the house (sometimes via solving other puzzles). It’s a bit like an old-school survival horror game or “point and click” game in this regard.

This is a screenshot from the “Croft Manor” level in “Tomb Raider: Anniversary” (2007). Unlike in the older games, this climbing room not only requires you to find an item by solving a puzzle in another part of the mansion, but it is itself a puzzle – requiring you to find a way to reach and push several switches around the room. You can then get a wrench which can be used to turn the water back on – which allows you to fill a bucket you found elsewhere and use it to extinguish a fire that is preventing you from reaching another item that you uncovered by solving an earlier puzzle. This is actual proper gameplay… in a tutorial level.

For example, you might find that you can climb up to a ledge in a storage room, but there’s a pulley rope that has to be cut in order to progress further. In other words, you have to go to a different part of the house and find a pair of guns that will allow you to shoot through it.

Although videogame puzzles really aren’t my strong point, and I’d almost forgotten what a large part of the “Tomb Raider” series they are, this level does at least mirror the typical type of gameplay in the series. It gives the player actual hands-on experience with the type of thing that they will be doing during the main game. However, because there aren’t incessant tutorial prompts and because it actually has some level of challenge to it, it feels compelling in a way that tutorial levels usually don’t. Again, it’s literally like a small game in its own right. The sort of thing that, traditionally, could have been released as a demo.

Yes, a lot of games will subtly do stuff like this. Most designers know that most players won’t bother with the tutorial or won’t read the manual (anyone remember those?), so they will sometimes make the first level of the game reasonably easy in order to allow the player time to work things out on their own. Still, this is the first time that I’ve seen an actual dedicated tutorial level that does this.

And, again, it is brilliant. Rather than being a boring chore you have to get through in order to play the main game, it is actually fun in it’s own right. It’s a challenging, compelling small game which shows you what the main game will be like – but in a slightly more “safe” way. Instead of delivering a dull lecture, the designers actually thought about the tutorial level from the player’s perspective and turned it into something genuinely fun.

Again, I’m just astonished that a tutorial level can actually be enjoyable for once!

——————–

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

What Makes A Linear Horror Game Good?

Well, for this article in the second season of my “Horror Videogames Series“, I thought that I’d talk about linear horror games. Or, more accurately, what sets a good linear horror game apart from a bad one.

This was something I ended up thinking about when, the day before writing this article, I finally summoned the courage to try playing “Outlast” (2013) again. Thanks to having more experience with “run and hide” horror games in the year or two since my last serious attempt at playing this ultra-terrifying game, I was delighted to find that I had the fortitude to withstand about twenty-five minutes of it this time. Still, picking up this game again reminded me of how… linear… it is.

This is a screenshot from “Outlast” (2013), a first-person perspective horror game where you play as a journalist with a camcorder who explores a creepy semi-abandoned mental hospital. It is a game that has, on at least a couple of previous occasions, literally scared me away from playing any more of it…

Often, there is just one “correct” path that you have to follow. Any doors that aren’t critical to the game’s story remain firmly locked and are purely decorative. You have to move through the game’s locations via just one pre-set route. If you try to explore, you’ll just find dead ends (and the occasional jump scare). And, yet, despite all of this, it is still a surprisingly compelling and ridiculously scary horror game.

So, how does “Outlast” (2013) manage to be both linear and good? There are a few reasons for this – the first is probably that it actually has skill-based gameplay with the possibility of a fail state. In other words, there is actual suspense – a lot of it – because you can get a “game over” if you mess up during the game’s stealth segments and/or chase sequences. These segments also have a bit of challenge to them too, preventing the game from feeling like a boring interactive movie.

A great example of another game that does something vaguely similar is probably the action-horror game “Resident Evil 4” (2005). Even though this game follows a relatively linear path compared to older “Resident Evil” games, the game’s action elements are frantic and skill-based enough to keep the game feeling like… well… an actual game. You have to aim carefully, choose which weapon to use, run away sometimes etc… It actually has proper skill-based gameplay.

This is a screenshot from “Resident Evil 4” (2005) showing the main character, Leon, frantically reloading his pistol whilst a zombie-like villager charges at him. The thrilling fast-paced action gameplay in this game really helps to take the player’s attention away from just how linear the level design actually is.

Yet another example of this sort of thing is possibly the indie horror game “Korpus: Buried Over The Black Soil” (2020). Although this game has a very linear path and some gameplay-free “walking simulator” segments, the designers actually made sure to include at least a few skill-based segments where the player can get a “game over” if they mess up. This makes the game so much more suspenseful and compelling than the average “walking simulator” horror game.

Secondly, another reason why “Outlast” is still a good horror game despite being ridiculously linear is because of clever level design. Not only do some segments sometimes loop around to earlier areas, giving the impression of non-linear level design but the game also knows when to make the level design a bit more free-form too.

In short, whenever you’re in a place where someone is chasing or hunting you, the level sometimes opens up just a little bit. There are hiding places, multiple corridors to go down and stuff like that. The game actually gives you a bit of room to sneak around in. Again, this makes the game feel less linear.

This is a screenshot from “Outlast” (2013), showing the main character escaping from an angry monster via a narrow passageway. This whole segment of the game takes place within a large room with a few corridors and a couple of valves that you have to open. Even though it’s just one area, the fact that you’re given a bit of a choice about which valve to open first, plus a few passageways and hiding places, makes the game feel a bit less linear.

Needless to say, “Resident Evil 4” (2005) also uses this technique too. Sometimes, there will be arena-like areas where you have to fight larger numbers of monsters. Sometimes, you’ll return to slightly earlier areas or have to find a key of some kind. The layout of the game is still fairly linear, but there are enough loops and open areas to make it feel a bit less linear.

Finally, variety can do a lot to make a linear horror game feel gripping rather than boring. “Outlast” (2013) includes several different monsters and/or villains that the player has to avoid, not to mention a good mixture of “quiet” and “frantic” segments of the game too – even if the locations can look a bit monotonous sometimes.

Likewise, whilst you’ll… mostly… be fighting zombie-like enemies in “Resident Evil 4” (2005), the game’s designers prevent this from becoming dull or repetitive by including both visual and gameplay variety. Not only are there quite a few different character models for these enemies but – especially later in the game – they will also be designed in a way that requires the player to use different tactics (for example, some will turn into even more dangerous mutants when decapitated, some will wear helmets that protect their heads, some will be armoured everywhere except their heads etc…). All of this adds interesting variety to the gameplay.

So, yes, a good linear horror game will often have skill-based gameplay, clever level design to disguise how linear the game is and also a decent amount of variety too.

——————–

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

A Clever Level Design Trick Used In “Game Jam” Horror Games

Well, for this article in the second season of my “Horror Videogames Series“, I thought that I’d talk briefly about a clever level design trick that horror game developers can use when they only have a small amount of time and/or money to make a horror game.

This was something I ended up thinking about after playing two short indie horror games which were both made for “game jams” – timed game-making competitions – and noticing that both of them used this design trick surprisingly well. The games I’ll be talking about here are “The Devil” (2020) and “Kordonia (v.0.1)” (2021).

This article will contain SPOILERS for both games and for “Resident Evil” (1996/2002) too.

Both games use a “there and back” structure which allows them to have dramatic pacing and good suspense, whilst also getting twice as much out of just one “level” at the same time. In both games, you have to travel to somewhere in complete safety… and then make a dangerous return journey.

When used well, this technique quickly allows horror game designers to easily add excellent pacing to their games. Whether it is making the long journey down a tower filled with mysterious (and increasingly creepy) cultists in “The Devil” (2020) or cautiously navigating the empty – and increasingly gruesome – streets of an abandoned town in “Kordonia (v.0.1)” (2021), this technique allows the designers to use almost the entire area of the level for lots of dramatic, suspenseful build-up.

This is a screenshot from “The Devil” (2020). As you make your way down the game’s large maze-like tower, you can actually explore a bit and talk to all of the cultists there. In the upper to mid parts of the tower, like here, they’re reasonably friendly and ordinary but, as you descend further down, they become increasingly creepy…

Then, when the player reaches “the end”, something scary happens and they have to make their way back to the “beginning”. But everywhere they have just travelled through is now fraught with danger.

In “The Devil” (2020), everyone that you saw on the way down the tower has now been transformed into aggressive fast-moving zombies. In “Kordonia (v.0.1)” (2021), you find yourself being chased by a large monster….

This is a screenshot from “Kordonia (v.0.1)” (2021). It’s a bit difficult to see, and sorry about the random mouse cursor, but there’s a large monster advancing towards the main character on the left-hand side of this screenshot….

Because the gameplay changes drastically on the return journey, and the player is approaching everywhere from the opposite direction, it feels less “repetitive” than you might expect. However, the designers of both games go a step further than this to keep the gameplay compelling during the second halves of their games.

In both games, the level design is deliberately disorientating and maze-like. In “The Devil” (2020), the tower is like an M. C. Escher maze of stairways, narrow passages and dead ends. In “Kordonia (v.0.1)” (2021), the streets are shrouded in “Silent Hill”-inspired fog, some are blocked off with confusing invisible walls and a crucially important passageway between two parts of the level is hidden in shadow. These are levels that are designed to be a challenge to navigate.

Not only does this maze-like design add a little bit of actual gameplay to the “safe” first half of both games, but it also gives players a chance to memorise the location before they have to frantically retrace their steps whilst fleeing danger. In other words, like in the classic survival horror games of the 1990s and early-mid 2000s, it rewards players who are willing to actually explore and observe their surroundings.

Not to mention that having to navigate a confusing maze at high speed, where a single mistake can mean “game over” adds a lot of extra suspense too. Thankfully both games try to at least reduce any frustration caused by this, whilst also keeping up the difficulty level, by including at least one or two auto-save points. What this means is that whilst failure will cost you some progress, you won’t have to re-play the entire first half of the game again.

Interestingly, this technique mostly seems to work best with shorter horror games – although there are some interesting, if slightly different, precursors to it in the genre’s history though. The most famous example is probably “Resident Evil” (1996/2002).

In both the original 1996 version of the game and the 2002 remake – the player begins by exploring a creepy zombie-filled mansion. Some doors won’t be able to be unlocked until you’ve left the mansion and travelled to a separate area in the mansion’s grounds. Once you complete this area, you have to return to the mansion… which is now populated by much more dangerous reptilian monsters called “Hunters”.

This is a screenshot from the 2002 remake of “Resident Evil”, showing a reptilian “Hunter” monster lurking behind the main character. These creatures suddenly show up when you return to the mansion after exploring a building in the grounds. It isn’t exactly the same as the design technique I was talking about earlier, but it’s an interesting precursor…

Whilst this isn’t exactly the same as the level design technique I described earlier, it was still a clever way for the designers to re-use earlier areas of the game in a way that allowed them to remain scary and not feel “repetitive” either.

But, anyway, using a “there and back” structure allows indie horror game designers to not only include better pacing but also to get “twice as much” out of just one level too.

—————————

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

Navigation In Classic-Style Survival Horror Games

Well, for this article in the second season of my “Horror Videogames Series“, I thought that I’d talk about navigation in classic-style survival horror games. This is one of those things where the classic “Resident Evil” games (1996-2004) and the classic “Silent Hill” games (1999-2004) differ greatly from each other.

I ended up thinking about this topic whilst re-playing part of the original “Resident Evil 2” (1998). One of the great things about this game is the way that there are so many different routes and shortcuts you can use to get to different parts of the large police station that… most… of the earlier parts of the game take place in. These open up as the game progresses, guiding the player whilst also making backtracking easier. And, given the amount of “back and forth” needed for some puzzles and the fact that you’ve got limited inventory space (and therefore often need to find the nearest storage box quickly), finding shortcuts becomes even more important.

Yes, the later areas of the game have a bit less flexibility, but the “police station” parts of the game are so fun and memorable because they focus on a single location that you’ve actually got to take the time to learn. Put another way, I started playing this game again several months after my last re-play of it (and several years after the one before that), and I was still able to navigate the police station with ease. The game is so brilliantly memorable because the location is dense, non-linear and can often be navigated in multiple ways.

And both “Resident Evil” (1996/2002) and the original “Resident Evil 3” (1999) also do this to a certain extent too. In fact, the excellent 2002 remake of “Resident Evil” actually takes it a step further because – if you know anything about the game – you’ll probably want to use alternative routes sometimes because it can be dangerous to enter certain areas from particular directions or at certain times. Knowing your way around is important, and having to memorise the layout of these games probably also helps them to be so memorable too.

Yes, you can check a map – but you actually have to find maps for each area and they are a little bit of a hassle to use, so the player is encouraged to remember everything.

And, although some other classic “Resident Evil” games – like “Resident Evil: Code Veronica X” (2001) and “Resident Evil Zero” (2002) – don’t always offer the player quite as much flexibility, one of the hallmarks of these classic games are non-linear early game areas that can be navigated in a variety of ways.

On the other hand, the classic “Silent Hill” games do something very different to this. In these games – especially “Silent Hill” (1999) and “Silent Hill 2” (2001) – the locations are meant to be daunting and disorientating. There are large outdoor areas shrouded in dense fog and indoor areas filled with more doors – many of them completely useless locked doors– than you can remember. This is all part of the psychological horror that the “Silent Hill” series is famous for.

In these games, the “map” screen becomes ridiculously useful. This is helped by the fact that the game will annotate the map for you as you explore. There’s slightly less emphasis on learning a location off by heart and more of an emphasis on exploring. This allows these game to create tension since many of the areas look or sound creepy enough that you might be nervous about exploring them too thoroughly.

Not only that, locations in these games aren’t always the most reliable things in the world. Famously, at certain points in these games, the world around you will… change… into a nightmarish “otherworld” version of itself. This can open up and/or close off certain areas, making everything you’ve learnt about the “ordinary” version of a location irrelevant. Many of these games will also include deliberately confusing maze-like areas, such as the subway level in “Silent Hill 3” (2003), that are difficult to navigate easily.

Not to mention that, in one famously creepy part of “Silent Hill 2” (2001), the map screen is completely blank when you enter a certain area… and only gets filled in gradually as you keep exploring it. When I first encountered this area back in the day, the lack of a full map absolutely terrified me. It really felt like I was somewhere where I wasn’t supposed to be and that anything could be lurking within it…

Although you will obviously learn your way around a particular place after a while, these games actively discourage too much of this. This is probably one reason why they can still be scary when you replay them – because the locations are too large and complicated to memorise easily, there’s still a slight element of “the fear of the unknown” if you return to one of these games after a while.

Interestingly though, the modern “classic-style” survival horror games that I’ve played recently – “Alisa”  (2021) and “Tormented Souls” (2021) – both take more of a “Resident Evil”-style approach to navigation. Yes, the locations in these games don’t have quite the number of shortcuts and alternate routes as the early parts of an old “Resident Evil” game do, but they are designed to be memorised and learnt.

But, these days, this style of location design is – ironically – at its absolute best in stealth-based “run and hide” survival horror games like “Remothered: Broken Porcelain” (2020). Because the player has to actively avoid villains or monsters, alternative routes are an absolute necessity. And, although some stealth-horror games do have large locations, the genre is often at it’s very best when the player is actually able to learn and memorise a more densely-designed location.

Navigation is a surprisingly important part of horror games – since it is something that the player will be doing regularly. This is why horror games are often at their best when the locations are at least somewhat non-linear. Having to actively find your way around somewhere is infinitely more immersive and suspenseful than, for example, just walking along a series of linear corridors.

—————–

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

How Modern Survival Horror Games Handle Sewer Levels Differently

Well, for this article in the second season of my “Horror Videogames Series“, I thought that I’d talk about how modern survival horror games handle sewer levels differently to classic survival horror games. But, first, some history…

Traditionally, sewer levels have been one of the most dreaded location types in videogames. Often less visually dramatic than other locations, they are synonymous with “monotony”. This boredom is also often paired with frustration – given their disorientating maze-like design in many games. However, on a game design level, they have the advantage of being somewhere that is “realistic”, yet also not well-known enough by players to allow for a lot of artistic licence. And this is why horror game designers love to use this setting so often.

They are an unseen place, which is literally right below our feet. They are something that – quite understandably – most people avoid thinking about too much. There are urban legends in parts of the US about dangerous alligators roaming them and, in the UK, there has been the real problem of gross-looking fatbergs appearing in them. They were something that was built, rather than formed naturally. They are also relatively modern things, but are often old enough to still be creepy. Most of all, for horror game designers, they are places that instantly evoke feelings of disgust and claustrophobia.

In horror games, they are rarely presented realistically for game design reasons. Survival horror game sewers are often more like a series of large catacombs than the relatively narrow pipes and tunnels than you might expect. If you’ve ever seen news footage or documentary footage about sewers – at least in the UK – you’ll know that they are a lot smaller and more cramped than the ones you’ll typically find in horror games. Still, this is a necessary piece of artistic licence, since it makes gameplay a bit more practical.

Sewer levels are one of those things that survival horror game designers love, but players generally don’t.

Yet, there are well-designed sewer levels in some classic survival horror games. The classic example is probably “Resident Evil 2” (1998) – not only does this game keep its actual sewer small and relatively easy to navigate, but there are platform-like corridors that the player can climb onto – adding a small amount of verticality. This area of the game also isn’t too confusing or boring, thanks to the fact that most of it actually takes place in the surrounding treatment facility – allowing for more visual variety and therefore easier navigation.

There are also some genuine scares in the actual sewers, thanks to the inclusion of some genuinely frightening “giant arachnid” monsters. Plus, in a nearby service corridor, there is also a boss monster that is based on the classic American urban legend too:

This is a screenshot from “Resident Evil 2” (1998), showing the “sewer alligator” boss. Who would have thought it?

Again, the player spends more time in side-areas than in the actual sewer itself. But, in a brilliant piece of design, the player does actually has to wade through thigh-high water occasionally. This adds realism and a more immediate feeling of disgust than the genteel – and probably unrealistic – raised walkways found in the sewer tunnels in “Silent Hill” (1999).

Yes, these narrow walkways add claustrophobia and extra challenge – since the player has to find a bridge to cross to the other side, but they still seem a little on the stylised side of things. Still, the game shakes things up a little by including a few open areas – with wire mesh flooring – in order to break up the monotony. Plus, the game presents the sewer level as more of a “between levels” thing than a full level in its own right. A liminal space, somewhere between more important places.

This is a screenshot of the sewer entrance in “Silent Hill” (1999). Even the game itself presents this level as something you need to trudge through in order to get to a more interesting level.

Notice how I haven’t included any screenshots of the actual sewer tunnels from these older survial horror games? This wasn’t out of prudishness but because, when I looked back through the screenshots I’d taken whilst playing these games, I couldn’t find any of the actual tunnels. They were – relatively – forgettable areas. Areas not worth documenting. And perhaps this sums up the general flaw with classic survival horror sewer levels. Dull, forgettable and more of a chore than anything enjoyable.

Still, this brings us on to modern “classic-style” survival horror games. These games are often indie games made by fans of the genre and, luckily, they have noticed some of the flaws with sewer levels in older survival horror games and done things a little differently.

A good example of this can be seen in “Alisa” (2021), where the game does include sewer-like catacombs for the sake of tradition – but sensibly relegates them to a single-room area where the player has to fight a claustrophobic arena battle against waves of enemies. It’s a refreshing change of pace from the slow trudging boredom of a typical “sewer level”.

This is a screenshot of the underground arena from “Alisa” (2021) where, instead of lots of monotonous maze-like exploration, the player has a frantic fight against waves of monsters in a single room.

But, an even better example of a good modern “classic-style” survival horror sewer level can be found in “Tormented Souls” (2021). Although the sewer level in this game is clearly inspired by the one from “Silent Hill” (1999) – even down to the raised walkways (although they are made of old-fashioned stone rather than rusty metal) – it is so much better. This is mostly because of the way that it plays with the player’s expectations.

When classic survival horror fans first discover the area, they’ll expect a boring confusing maze. Yet, not only is it slightly shorter than you might expect but it only gives the illusion of being a “confusing” area.

The actual design of the sewer area in this game is surprisingly linear. There’s just one long path with a couple of side-areas. Yet, the path takes so many twists and turns that it initially feels less linear than it actually is. This also has the added advantage of making backtracking ridiculously easy whenever the player has to leave the sewer. It’s one of the relatively few good examples of linear level design in a horror game.

This is a screenshot of the sewer level from “Tormented Souls” (2021). An unusual example of linear level design actually being a good thing.

So, yes, modern survival horror games will often do clever things to make their sewer levels less boring, annoying or forgettable than those found in the classics. Often, they are more there as a relatively brief reference to the classics than as a full level in their own right. It’s a really good balance between the fact that game designers often love making these types of levels, but players often don’t enjoy playing them.

———————-

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

Level Length In Horror Games

Well, for this article in my series about horror videogames, I thought that I’d talk about level length. One of the interesting things about horror games is that – like role-playing games and “point and click” games – many of them don’t actually have defined “levels” and are instead just one large level.

A good modern example of this sort of thing is a terrifying “run and hide” survival horror game called “Remothered: Tormented Fathers” (2018) that almost entirely takes place within a creepy 1970s mansion. Although there is a short outdoor area at the beginning and a couple of segments that take place in parts of the mansion that are only visited once or twice (eg: the attic and wine cellar), there aren’t really any defined level boundaries and the game just progresses like it is a single “level”. This works really well because it makes the mansion feel more claustrophobic and more like a real location that the player will get to know well.

And realism is one reason why horror games often don’t include multiple levels. This trend was started by either “Alone In The Dark” (1992) or “Resident Evil” (1996), both of which involve exploring a large mansion and other areas connected to it. And, as well as adding a more realistic atmosphere, the lack of defined levels also helps to emphasise exploration too.

Without levels, these games can also be a bit more non-linear too, with the player able to either complete some parts of the game in any order they want (such as some of the earlier puzzles in “Resident Evil”) or to solve problems in multiple ways (such as a zombie-filled room in “Alone In The Dark” where the player can either fight the zombies or distract them). It makes the game feel a bit more open – and thus gives the player more options, which fits in perfectly with the “survival” elements of these games since the player has to think carefully about what the best option would be.

Pacing is another reason why horror games often only have one “level”. Scary horror games are almost always slower-paced games. The lack of clearly-defined levels plays into this, since its harder for new players to gauge how far through the game they are and how much progress they are making. This shifts the focus from rushing forwards towards an end goal to just focusing more on the present moment.

Still, although multiple levels aren’t that common in horror games, they do appear sometimes. The classic “Silent Hill” games (1999-2004) are an interesting example of this since they all contain a “soft” level system. In the first two games, the player has to traverse an open-world setting between visiting large buildings. Each building is like a self-contained level, and these levels are long and complex enough to almost feel like a short survival horror game in their own right. Still, although these games never explicitly say “levels”, the open-world segments serve as a way of separating each level-like area.

Both the third and fourth games in the series take a slightly more linear approach. “Silent Hill 3” (2003) has a more traditional linear structure to it, with the level changes being defined by cutscenes, boss battles and/or location changes (that don’t allow the player to return to earlier areas). These levels are, again, self-contained things that are long and complex enough to almost feel like miniature survival horror games. “Silent Hill 4” (2004) does something relatively similar, but includes a hub area that the player returns to between each level. Although it can also be returned to during most levels (for saving and item storage), it provides a much more well-defined “ending” to each level.

This “soft” level system allows these games to give the player a more well-defined feeling of progression, whilst also being seamless enough to give these games the feeling of a more continuous and “realistic” story too.

Even though the use of levels is one of the many differences between the classic games in the “Silent Hill” and “Resident Evil” franchises, its interesting to note that the “Silent Hill” games still keep their levels large and long enough to maintain a suspensefully slow pace, create a somewhat realistic atmosphere and to allow for lots of exploration too. Despite their level-based structure, these games still feel a lot more like traditional single-level survival horror games than any other type of game.

Still, there are horror games with shorter levels and this can have some interesting effects. A good example of this is probably a slightly overlooked PS2 game called “Forbidden Siren 2” (2006). Although I’ve only played the demo version of this game and watched some online footage of the full version, one of its defining features is very short and very linear “mission”-based levels. Each one only seems to be a few minutes long – and the player is given an objective at the beginning and guidance about how to achieve it.

These tiny levels allow the game to juggle a large cast of playable characters and to tell a larger-scale story in a fragmented way. The frequent character changes not only add mystery to the game, but keep the gameplay fresh too. They also make everything feel like a typical third-person perspective thriller novel – which will often include alternating chapters focusing on different characters in order to add lots of compelling “mini-cliffhangers” in order to keep the reader reading.

Interestingly, although this game has a lot in common with classic survival horror games – except for the camera system and stealth elements – it feels very different to them. The short levels and mission-based structure give it a much more abrupt and focused atmosphere. These levels feel like individual scenes from a horror movie. It’s a really interesting creative choice that makes the game feel unique, even if it comes at the cost of exploration and more sustained slower-paced suspense.

Another game, which is probably more “horror-adjacent” than full-on horror, that uses shorter levels is “Devil Daggers” (2016). This fast-paced horror-themed first-person shooter game only has one level – and the player is scored on how long they manage to survive within it. Technically, this is an extremely long level since it can carry on endlessly if the player is good enough. However, given that – at the time of writing (28th July 2021) – the current world record is only about nineteen and a half minutes, it is a short level in all practical terms. Seriously, even getting up to three minutes can take several hours of practice.

This game uses short levels both to add a slight level of “trapped in a time loop”-style creepiness to the game but also as a way of making it more compelling. Short levels – like short online videos – are designed to hook the audience. Because the audience is only initially asked to give a small amount of time, they’re more likely to think “Just one more go. I’ve got time“… and, before you know it, two or three hours have passed. So, shorter levels can also be used to make games – including horror games – more compelling.

So, yes, level length can have a surprising effect on the mood and atmosphere of a horror game. Although long levels are a lot more common, since they allow for slower pacing and a more “realistic” atmosphere, shorter levels can be used in clever ways to affect the mood of a horror game or to make it more compelling.

—————–

Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂