SoundFX

I am working on some areas for my game and wanted to get feedback on the general layout of things. It is a mix between an RPG and platformer. You can see an example of how the game plays here: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNNiZcaIh4M

 

And what I have so far of one of my areas is here:

http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/8852/startingarea.png (warning: large image!)

 

Please note that the background is white because in-game it renders the background (as per the video). Also note all in-game assets are NOT present in the image export because that layer also contains collision data and is very hard to see the actual layout if I show it as well -- this includes vertical platforms (as hinted by the rails), doors, enemies, flame pipes, item boxes, etc. And of course, the left part of the lower drop is not done yet.

 

I just want to know if the general flow of the areas makes sense or if I will cause too much confusion for the players. I want to lead them somewhat, but give them freedom without them feeling totally lost.

 

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!

It looks good. I wanted to suggest maybe getting a copy of super meat boy if you haven't already played it. While it's arguable its sort of in a genre on its own, the platformer is still a vast majority of it. The mechanics in the game led to some very intricate level design mainly through the placement of things that will kill you. I mention SMB because I for one absolutely loved the levels, and the way in which they ramp up the difficulty as you progress and perfect old moves.

With that said, your game will most undoubtedly have its own nuances in which you can design your levels around your mechanics. In addition you can always put, say extra lives, in tricky and/or dangerous spots. Tempation is a good motivator.

Somebody may disagree with me on this but Starcraft (or Starcraft 2 which is practically the same) has everything one would want from RTS game. That is base building, multiple races, multiple resources, near perfect balance inbetween. But for me in all RTS game after a while it boils down to -> do this, this and this in exactly this order, under certain amount of time and you will win.

I completely disagree. I feel Relic has a far superior system seen in Company of Heroes and the Dawn of Wars. I will touch on what I love about them below and what I feel is necessary as well. Don't get me wrong SC2 has a tremendous following, but that doesn't mean it's the best RTS available.

I love Dawn of War and Company of Heroes over say Starcraft for two reasons. Simpler micro managing and no gatherers. The gathering is based off of territorial control which in turn forces combat. Simple micro managing lowers the skill base while still allowing room for expertise. By forcing combat and lowering the skill level required to compete you have now turned a time-sink RTS into a Thinking RTS, which is where I think most RTS' lack.

Other things like cover are just icing on the cake.

With that said here are some things I think are necessary for RTS:

• Two (or more) Resource System
• Objectives to force combat/taking actions
• An easy to understand Rock-Paper-Scissors unit approach (Doesn't have to be direct counters, For example AA guns hurt tanks in Company of Heroes but they do extra damage in the rear, Self Explanatory really but it makes you want to get behind them, but you don't have to and can still be effective)
• Keep the "racing to perform actions" to a minimum and the choice of "what actions do I take" at the forefront

Like another poster said I too also enjoy a limited number of unit choices but I don't mind if I have a small army (Company of Heroes) or a giant one (Homeworld). I