Level Design

Summary

Level design is the practice of constructing the experience offered directly to the player within each level of a game. The level designer takes a game designer’s general plans — mechanics, challenge types, story — and makes them specific and concrete: particular spaces, sequences of events, challenge placements, and atmospheric choices. Level design applies all game design principles to temporal and spatial structure.

(Adams, Fundamentals of Game Design, see source-fundamentals-game-design)

Level designer’s responsibilities

Adams (Ch. 16) identifies five things level designers create:

1. The space — 2D or 3D environment using modelling tools
2. Initial conditions — State of changeable features, resources, enemy counts at start
3. The set of challenges — Which challenges the player faces, in what sequence
4. Termination conditions — How the level ends (victory and/or loss)
5. Story/aesthetics integration — How gameplay integrates with narrative; mood and atmosphere

Universal level design principles

These principles apply across genres:

• Make early levels tutorial levels. Teach the game through play, not instruction.
• Vary the pacing. Alternate fast/intense sections with slower rest periods. Fast pace followed by no challenges; then gradual ramp. (See “Progression and Pacing” below.)
• Replenish resources after a draining challenge. If a challenge costs health or ammunition, provide a supply cache in the area immediately after.
• Avoid conceptual non sequiturs. Do not put things in places no rational person would expect (e.g. medical kits inside oil drums in a realistic game). This penalises players for using their intelligence.
• Clearly inform the player of short-term goals. At any moment, the player’s immediate objective should be obvious. The overall victory condition is always stated; the current sub-goal is always clear.
• Be clear about risks, rewards, and consequences. The “learn by dying” approach is bad design. Players should be able to estimate the cost of failure and the benefit of success before committing.

Atmosphere

Level designers assemble art assets into a cohesive experience. Tools for creating atmosphere:

• Lighting — placement, orientation, and colour (sodium vapour = danger; soft morning light = warmth)
• Colour palette — emerges from object colours + lighting; can telegraph emotion
• Weather and atmospheric effects — fog (mystery), rain, snow, wind
• Special visual effects — explosions, magic sparks, blood; used to startle, reward, or discomfit
• Music — rhythm sets pace; timbre and key set mood
• Ambient audio — birds and crickets (golf course tranquillity); steam engines (power and danger)
• Special audio effects — tyre squeal conveys loss of grip before the player can see it

Level structure taxonomy (CRE133)

At the macro scale — across an entire game rather than within a single level — several structural models organise how players move through content:

Structure	Description	Benefits	Challenges	Examples
Linear	Single path; one clear sequence from start to finish	Tight narrative control; reliable pacing	Limited player agency; replay value lower	Uncharted, Final Fantasy XIII
Open world / non-linear	Large free environment; player chooses tasks	Exploration freedom; high agency; immersion	Cohesive narrative difficult; player overwhelm	Skyrim, Red Dead Redemption 2
Hub and spoke	Central hub connects to multiple areas; player returns to hub	Exploration within structure; sense of community	Hub can feel like loading screen if underdesigned	Dark Souls (Firelink Shrine)
Stage / level segmentation	Divided into distinct chapters, each with own challenges and mechanics	Clear progression; opportunities to introduce new mechanics per segment	Risk of tonal inconsistency between stages	Celeste (each chapter)

Most large games use combination structures — a linear narrative spine with open-world or hub-and-spoke side content branching off it.

Convexity design (CRE133)

Convexity design is a level structure model that bridges linear and non-linear approaches. A convexity is described as a linear structure with non-linear content: the player progresses forward through a defined path, but each step of that path opens outward into meaningful choices before converging again.

At the start, the player may have only one choice. As the convexity widens, more of the game becomes visible and accessible. A chain of convexities provides a series of short-term goals, each of which reveals the next layer of the game space:

Start → [Choice A / Choice B] → Converge → [Choice A / B / C] → Converge → ...

Why it works:

• Provides an increasing sense of freedom and discovery without the navigational overwhelm of full open-world design
• The narrowness at the start calibrates challenge to the player’s initial skill level (connecting directly to flow theory — see flow)
• Short-term goals keep players motivated through visible, achievable next steps
• Csíkszentmihályi: “Clear goals, achievable challenges, and accurate feedback are required to achieve a state of flow”

Design relationship to flow: The convexity model is in effect a spatial implementation of the flow channel. The widening structure means challenge and choice scale with developing player competence, keeping the experience in the productive zone between boredom (too easy, too obvious) and anxiety (too overwhelming). (CRE133 Lectures, see source-cre133-lectures)

Layouts

The physical layout determines how the player moves and encounters challenges.

Layout type	Description	Suited to
Linear	Single path through the level	Story-driven games; tight narrative control
Parallel	Multiple routes that converge	Allows player choice; still directed
Ring/Loop	Circular path; player returns to starting point	Exploration with continuity
Network/Hub	Central hub connects to multiple branches	RPG sub-quests; sandbox structure
Combination	Linear main arc with networked side content	Large RPGs; adventure games with main + bonus areas

Most large games use combination layouts — a linear story arc with side-branch optional content (bonus levels, side quests).

Progression and pacing

Designing progression across levels

Five features should exhibit progression (after Lopez, 2006, as discussed by Adams):

1. Mechanics — Core mechanics become richer; the internal economy grows more complex
2. Experience duration — Levels should take progressively longer to complete
3. Ancillary rewards — Cut-scenes, trophies, unlockable cosmetics
4. Practical gameplay rewards — New vehicles, skills, gear, technology
5. Difficulty — Perceived difficulty rises throughout the game

Additional progression features: new actions available; story advancement; character growth (literary maturity, not just power).

Sawtooth difficulty progression

Each level should start at a perceived difficulty slightly lower than where the previous level ended, then increase through the level. The next level starts lower again:

Difficulty
    ↑     /|  /|  /|
    |    / | / | / |
    |   /  |/  |/  |
    +---Level 1--Level 2--Level 3→ Time

“Design Rule: Don’t jump difficulty from level to level. Do not introduce sudden difficulty jumps between the end of one level and the beginning of the next.” — Adams, Ch. 15

Designing the pacing within a level

• Vary pace: alternate intense challenge with rest (exploration, low-stakes activity, cut-scene)
• Genre conventions: old-school shooters and action games → fast; adventure games → slow; stealth → slow with brief intense moments
• Boss at level end: tradition in action games; a particularly difficult final challenge that rewards victory with resources, narrative payoff, or level completion

Tutorial levels

Every commercial game except the simplest should include tutorial levels. Two types:

• Explicit: separate optional levels (sports training camps, standalone tutorial modes)
• Implicit: the early levels of the game, carefully crafted to teach as the player plays

Tutorial level principles:

• Introduce features in order from most general/common to most specialised
• Don’t make all features available at once — disable them until introduced
• Let players try things repeatedly without penalty
• Highlight UI elements with arrows or glows when referring to them
• Make tutorial levels optional — experienced players will be irritated by forced instruction

The level design process (11 stages)

Based on Knowles & Ganetakos (Pseudo Interactive, 2004):

1. Design to level design handoff — game designers specify setting, mood, key gameplay, and events
2. Planning phase — gameplay plan (layout, pacing, challenges, resources, NPCs), art plan (scope, props, textures), performance plan (geometry limits, render distances)
3. Prototype creation — build a blockout/greybox version of the level using placeholder assets
4. Level review — review prototype with team; catch problems before art is committed
5. Lock the level design — no additions except critical fixes; prevents scope creep
6. Level design to art handoff — hand prototype + design documentation to art team as blueprint
7. First art and rigging pass — art team builds final artwork and rigging
8. Art to level design handoff and review — review final artwork; flag errors
9. Content integration — assemble all assets (art, code, audio, lighting) into the completed level
10. Bug fixing — test the level for code bugs and content mistakes; hand off to QA
11. User testing and tuning — alpha testing; invite target audience to play-test; beta testing

Common pitfalls

Scope too large

The most common error by inexperienced level designers. Epic projects are appealing but require huge budgets and teams. Choose a scope your team can actually deliver within available time and staff.

“Design Rule: Get the scope right! Game projects fail most often — especially student projects — because of overambition.” — Adams, Ch. 16

Conceptual non sequiturs

Features that make no sense in the context of the game world. In James Bond: Tomorrow Never Dies, medical kits were hidden in oil drums — punishing players for applying real-world logic. In realistic games, real-world assumptions should hold.

“Avoid conceptual non sequiturs in realistic games. They discourage new players and make your game unnecessarily hard without making it more fun.” — Adams, Ch. 16

Making atypical levels mandatory

Unusual levels (pure jumping-only, genre-switching, ability-stripping) can be great fun as optional content but should not be required to complete the game. They break the player’s established mental model and may make the game unbeatable for players who are skilled in all expected challenge types but not this specific outlier.

Showing the player everything at once

Never introduce all mechanics, enemies, and environments in a single level. Leave content in reserve — novelty sustains engagement throughout the game.

Never lose sight of your audience

Level designers, more than anyone else on the team, must apply the player-centric approach to every decision. You are not the player. Go inside the mind of your target player and ask: what is this like for the first time?

Encounter-based level structure (Kristjan)

Kristjan (We Deserve Better Villains, Ch. 4) frames level design at two scales: the level as a whole, and the encounters inside it.

At the level scale: Every level should have a beginning, middle, and end. This compartmentalises the level into sections that can each be independently designed for, and gives the level a narrative arc — the player experiences something that builds, escalates, and resolves. No two levels should feel the same; variety between levels prevents habituation.

At the encounter scale: Inside each level are encounters — discrete design moments that the player experiences. Each encounter can be independently tuned. A level is the sum of its encounters, which means encounter quality determines level quality.

The level as mixtape: Kristjan uses an audio analogy for level pacing:

“I like to think of each level as my own personal musical compilation (or mix tape) with highs and lows that create a story I want to tell. This auditory example lets me think of music for each encounter and in turn a template that tracks mood onto the encounters themselves. In the end, I should have a well-put-together album that is a feast for the player to enjoy, which will be the level design. Just remember to add diversity to the level itself like musical tracks in the compilation.” — Kristjan, Ch. 4

The mixtape framing has practical implications:

• Plan the emotional/intensity arc of the level before designing individual encounters (what mood does each encounter serve?)
• Vary encounter types the way a good playlist varies tempo and mood — back-to-back high-intensity encounters exhaust the player; back-to-back low-intensity sections bore them
• Each encounter is a “track” — independently memorable, but serving the whole

This connects directly to interest-curves (pacing over the play session) and flow (the sawtooth rhythm of challenge and recovery). The difference is that Kristjan applies this framing at the encounter-composition level — the designer’s conscious act of assembling encounters into an arc, not just a sequence.

(Kristjan, We Deserve Better Villains, see source-we-deserve-better-villains)

Evidence

Content drawn from Adams, Fundamentals of Game Design (3rd ed.), Ch. 16 (“General Principles of Level Design”).

The 11-stage process is sourced from Knowles & Ganetakos, “Level Design,” Computer Game Technology Conference, Toronto, 2004.

Implications

• Level design is where game design theory meets execution. Poor level design can ruin a well-designed game; excellent level design can elevate a simple game.
• The 11-stage process implies that level design begins with game-design-level handoff and ends with QA — it is an iterative, team-wide process, not a solo activity.
• Tutorial level design deserves as much effort as any regular level — perhaps more. The first 5 minutes determine whether players continue.

Open questions

• How does level design differ significantly between 2D and 3D games?
• What is the relationship between level design and narrative — when does space tell a story, and when does it just obstruct?
• Procedurally generated levels (roguelikes) cannot use authored spatial guidance. What design principles apply to procedural level generation?
• Environmental storytelling is mentioned but not systematically addressed by Adams. What design principles govern it?

Related

• challenge-types — Level designers select and sequence challenge types
• game-balance — Sawtooth difficulty; difficulty modes; positive feedback management at level scale
• interest-curves — Pacing applied to spatial design; interest curve structure maps to level structure
• flow — Encounter and pacing design maintains the flow channel
• game-feel — How movement and traversal feel within the level space
• playtesting — Levels require playtesting to reveal wayfinding and pacing problems
• semiotics-of-games — Environmental signs communicate information and guide players
• internal-economy — Progression mechanics (space, time, plot)
• player-centric-design — Never lose sight of the audience
• presence-and-immersion — how spatial design creates presence and different immersion types
• interaction-loops — the LDARF loop that players work through in each challenge the level presents
• villain-design — encounter design and enemy placement within levels; the Goblin Encounter problem
• source-fundamentals-game-design
• source-we-deserve-better-villains
• source-cre133-lectures