Okay, I know this is probably a stupid thread but I wanna see your opinions.

From current uploads and reactions to them, I keep finding it concludable that people look at eyecandy in levels and rate them based on how well their theme works as long as the level doesn't look horribly ugly. On the other hand, I often totally ignore eyecandy nowadays and just see if the level is fun to play and then look for the finer details on what is specifically flawed, like flow, or what is specifically cleverly designed such as small level-tricks that involve clever use of movement or guns.

Some people say eyecandy and gameplay are as important as eachother, some people skew towards one end. What do you think? Would you scrap a gorgeous area just to make it play better, or would you try your best to beautify it even if it hinders gameplay? I'd like to see your opinions with backed up answers.

if a level has obstructing eyecandy that won't disappear if you change your jj2 settings, I just never play it (that includes annoying darkness)

For multiplayer:

They're both important, but gameplay is more important. Also, people have always made their first judgments based on looks rather than how it plays. That's just how it is for most people. Gameplay is something that takes a lot longer to "sink in"... unless you are a good player, or a good level maker, it's hard to recognise good gameplay just by looking at the level. You have to play a few matches in it first, and that's a lot of work just to write a J2O review.

I also agree with Grytolle regarding obstructions. I have always tried to limit my use of layers 1-3 because it's usually just annoying if you block the player's view. Same goes with lighting.


For singleplayer:

Eyecandy is probably about equal to gameplay in terms of importance... you can have an extremely simple, easy level that looks beautiful and has a good story, and it will be a great SP level. However, a project should probably have a good balance of gameplay, eyecandy and story, rather than putting everything into one area. It's just that SP is really a lot more about the overall "presentation", rather than just how the level plays. If an SP level is ugly, I think it's fair to say it's bad. With MP, it's not as fair to judge based on looks.

An example of this is that elevator level in TR2. The elevator part is really what makes that level what it is, and it's such a cool effect. That alone makes it a good level. Without that part, it would actually be a fairly uninteresting level in terms of gameplay.

Also, in SP I think you should be allowed to break the rules about obstructive eyecandy. Obstructions can actually be an element of gameplay in SP, if they are used well. For example, you can use darkness to good effect, or hide enemies behind scenery (bats are good for this because they make a sound), or have secret areas. There's a very fine line between good use of obstructions and unfairness though.

Originally Posted by Grytolle

(that includes annoying darkness)

Agreed

That one tileset is probably the worst pallete edit I've ever seen, and I have no idea why anyone thinks it's a good idea to use it. It's especially bad if you play it in a window where everything behind it is a bright colour.

I remember getting complaints for using the night version of Swamps in The Marshland of Evil. And that tileset isn't even that dark. I eventually switched it to the day version, because even the most marginal gains in playability are worth making changes for.

The point is, people like to be able to see things as clearly as possible.

@EvilMike: As long as the 'mask' is clearly distinguishable from the background, anything goes. Even a black floor against a light grey cave, for example.

As for the topic, gameplay over eyecandy... and I think eyecandy is often sufficient if there are no tilebugs.

I doubt that level by Hitch is about gameplay even 20 %...

Also, I'd like to point out that levels like semi and bblair have the best kind of flow you can find. Navigating the level is easy with a few jumps, but it is also something you can develop in.
It is but silly if a level doesn't require the player to jump. That's when you're converting the importance of skillful movement to luck with lag in terms of gameplay.
Gameplay in levels with overly good flow isn't about skill nearly as much as in levels like semi or bblair where you actually have to jump around and not run in a straight line. It also makes gameplay a whole lot more interesting.

Anyway, gameplay is the main course, complemented by the eyecandy.
In the end, it's a good idea to have a healthy mix of levels that focus on gameplay and levels that focus on eyecandy.