Since the beginning of the Super Mario platforming series, players start each course entering on the left and progress through obstacles until they reach the goal on the right. This basic level progression design is somewhat arbitrary. It didn’t have to be this way. But with right-handedness being dominant, human vision being "widescreen," and d-pads working better when the pressure is applied closer to the center of the controller, the left to right progression style has become standard. This week we considered the pros, cons, and alternatives.
Mario games ... originally were intended to be very simple and easy to pick up and play... the original premise...Mario runs from left to right and there's a goal pole at the end and maybe there's some gaps in between that you have to jump over. — Miyamoto
Left To Right Design
Left to right (LTR) progression is simple and straightforward. Because of this many aspects of Mario’s game design and level design could be tuned more precisely. If you know players will travel LTR then the enemies can be designed to travel in the opposite direction. This chiasmus of movement paths creates conflict and challenge. Likewise, power ups like the Super Mushroom travel LTR often requiring players to chase them down.
The original Super Mario Bros. didn’t let players scroll the screen backward. So there was absolutely no confusion about which way to go. There was only one way. WIth this design players always knew the who, what, and where of the the challenge; Mario; Go save the princess. One course at a time. This focus of design is how Mario’s gameplay focuses on the essence of action gameplay; the timing of maneuvers (how to get past the next obstacle and when to time jumps).
More Space. More Possibilities. More problems
Shortly after Super Mario’s debut, Zelda and many other games showed how to represent a whole virtual world to explore rather than 2d level “slices”. Omnidirectional, non-linear, interconnected, and even three-dimensional layouts became options for defining gameplay spaces. Like with most design decisions, there are pros and cons to each of these options. Using three dimensions and creating larger continuous game worlds increases the amount of virtual space the player can explore exponentially. For this reason, large virtual spaces tend to feature exploration-based experiences. For these games, it takes more space to define and place objects and obstacles in the world. Whether the large space is 2D or 3D, the game camera can only see so much. Only so many element can fit on the screen limiting the density and complexity of the gameplay ideas created by these elements. To put it simply, large virtual spaces give the player more room to move around and explore without increasing the density of gameplay ideas while increasing the difficulty of presenting these ideas.
In terms of popularity and accessibility, exploring in games is about as easy as it gets. Players only need to move a character around and systematically or randomly uncover what's there. Even when there's nothing to find, the exploration experience of anticipation, action, and resolution is a satisfying story-like experience in itself.
Furthermore, exploring is more appealing when in context of a larger virtual world or player campaign. When every space visited is a permanently uncovered square on a large map, or when every item collected goes into a permanent collection, all the little actions the player makes adds up over time. This means everything doesn't have to be amazing or distinct; it just has to fit in the larger context.
When you have this big field, you have to fill it with lots of gameplay and fun....[focusing on climbing walls] started to create this overall game cycle where you prepare yourself for the climb, then you climb and you come to this reward. And it ended up solving a lot of the challenges that we were confronted with. — Fujibayashi on Breath of the Wild development
Production wise, creating large virtual spaces requires a lot more time and assets. Creating a smooth player experience generally requires features such as maps, stats on areas visited or items collected, or some kind of camera control. In terms of communication, the more elements in a gameplay idea, the harder it will be for the player to understand the idea. There are limits to human perception and learning. Complexity and quality do not scale up evenly with the size of the virtual space.
But I think for Super Mario Run , that basic premise [left to right + get the flag] was the gift that ... drove the development forward. — Miyamoto
The Super Mario Bros. platformer games represent some of the deepest, cleanest, and most fun action gameplay in the industry. The variety of challenge and gameplay ideas across the 7+ million user made courses in Super Mario Maker 2 is astounding. As designers, we strive to express ourselves. This requires exploring what we like and accounting for what the editor can make possible. Being a good designer means avoiding design problems and exploring options that are suited for the current platform and project.
I see little reason to design large, long, non-linear Mario Maker courses. Some of the biggest courses I've played are also some of the most frustrating and boring. Super Mario Maker 2's editor cannot make an open world, or a world map, or a persistent world, or anything like that. But if you're looking to add a touch of these elements to your courses we need to consider what’s possible in the Mario Maker Editor.
Different Types of Advanced Layouts
- Linear: Left to Right. Bottom to Top. Visa versa. When the main path of a level almost entirely moves in a single direction from start to finish with no option to do otherwise.
- Alternate Path (shortcut): When a linear layout features an alternate path (or two). This path must take the player into a separate area from the main path, otherwise it would be a layer in the existing linear layout.
- Branched Path (beginning or end): Multiple linear layouts that converge into a single path. Or a single path that branches into multiple linear layouts.
- Folded (single or accordion): When the main path through the layout forces players to reach the end of a linear path, and then backtrack through the same space ideally creating new gameplay challenges. It is possible to make a layout that folds multiple times on itself as players run back and forth.
- Circuit Lap: When progression through the main linear path is repeated through spatial means (like a racing track loop) or with warps/doors that transfer the player back to the start.
- Metroidvania: A large layout with areas that are locked behind power up locks requiring players to explore to gain power ups to further explore. Such a design also allows backtracking, revisiting areas, and benefits greatly from layered secrets everywhere.
- Theme Park / Open World: A large area featuring many smaller areas each with their own gameplay ideas. These areas can be accessed non-linearly (many orders) or possibly skipped.