Here’s a great article written by one of the designers on how one of my favorite games, GoldenEye, was made. The author actually attributes much of the games success to not following the “right” way of making games.
From the article:
The level creators, or architects were working without much level design, by which I mean often they had no player start points or exits in mind. Certainly they didn’t think about enemy positions or object positions. Their job was simply to produce an interesting space. After the levels were made, Dave or sometimes Duncan would be faced with filling them with objectives, enemies, and stuff. The benefit of this sloppy unplanned approach was that many of the levels in the game have a realistic and non-linear feel. There are rooms with no direct relevance to the level. There are multiple routes across the level. This is an anti-game design approach, frankly. It is inefficient because much of the level is unnecessary to the gameplay. But it contributes to a greater sense of freedom, and also realism. And in turn this sense of freedom and realism contributed enormously to the success of the game … I should mention that the entire team was very green. 8 of us had never worked on a game.

June 22nd, 2006 at 1:27 pm
you should cross-post this on Infendo, Nic!
June 22nd, 2006 at 3:34 pm
Sounds similar to the concept that Valve Software used when designing maps for Half-life 2. They went a step further, however, and had their mappers build maps without applying any textures to any surfaces. Their key focus was on gameplay rather than looks. Later, texture artists came in and textured everything in the maps. the result was one of the most (if not the) beautiful PC games ever created.
Huzzah, Nick?